Teams & Riders Nairo Quintana discussion thread

[yaco]

The silent assassin - Usually gets the job done.

 

[hrotha]

Re: Re:

So boring to attack from 6 k out on first mountain top finish

Wait, is 6 km out officially long-rage now?

 

[Bushman]

Re: Re:

So boring to attack from 6 k out on first mountain top finish

Wait, is 6 km out officially long-rage now?

I never said so but what do you expect? Quintana to make a long range attack, risky as hell, when he is likely to be the best climber and was positioned very well after the tt?

 

[hrotha]

I don't expect him to do ***-all, I just expect everybody to accept that, for many people, what he does is boring.

 

[Fernandez]

Hes got already an impressive palmares.

 

[Gigs_98]

Re:

His comments after the Tour last year really did it for me.

Sorry but I just hate posts like this. Thats exactly like the people who say Schleck was a boring rider because he complained about descents and cobbles. Yeah, its pretty stupid to complain about that, I agree, but did these comments change the way he rode? He did attack on stages with downhill finishes and he even attacked on the cobbles stage in the tour 2010 (I don't want to have a discussion if this attack was right because Contador was caught in a crash, but he did attack, thats a fact) so only because he said something stupid it didnt change the way he rode.

Same with Quintana. Since he said that he wants to ride more conservatively he absolutely always gets criticized for it. He was the freakin first who attacked on the climb last week and still people say he rode too defensive. That just doesnt make any sense at all. And even in the tour last year he only made a big tactical mistake in one single stage (La Toussuire) because in the other stages he did attack, even on penultimate climbs, but he just wasnt strong enough to drop Froome. I'm not saying that he is the most aggressive rider ever, but he simply isnt more defensive than 90% of all other gc riders.

 

[Brullnux]

Re: Re:

His comments after the Tour last year really did it for me.

Sorry but I just hate posts like this. Thats exactly like the people who say Schleck was a boring rider because he complained about descents and cobbles. Yeah, its pretty stupid to complain about that, I agree, but did these comments change the way he rode? He did attack on stages with downhill finishes and he even attacked on the cobbles stage in the tour 2010 (I don't want to have a discussion if this attack was right because Contador was caught in a crash, but he did attack, thats a fact) so only because he said something stupid it didnt change the way he rode.

Same with Quintana. Since he said that he wants to ride more conservatively he absolutely always gets criticized for it. He was the freakin first who attacked on the climb last week and still people say he rode too defensive. That just doesnt make any sense at all. And even in the tour last year he only made a big tactical mistake in one single stage (La Toussuire) because in the other stages he did attack, even on penultimate climbs, but he just wasnt strong enough to drop Froome. I'm not saying that he is the most aggressive rider ever, but he simply isnt more defensive than 90% of all other gc riders.

Since Quintana's victory at Val Martello in 2014, he hasn't put in any long range attacks - at least none of note. His speciality is attacking 5-10k from the line, sometimes 3k then attacking, putting if he's good 30-40 seconds into his rivals. Against a top Froome or Contador he'd get 10-20 seconds on a good day. Even on Stage 20 if the Tour when he had nothing to lose and everything to gain, he put in a mild half-hearted (if that) attack on the Croix de Fer. Then he took it up on the Alpe, but it was way too little too late.

Out of the top GT riders I'd say he's the most conservative. He used to be great, attacking from everywhere and anywhere (in the 2013 Tour and that Dauphine stage) but now he isn't. What changed? Look at Froome, Contador, Nibali. They haven't done this progression; if anything, they went the other way.

 

[Gigs_98]

Re: Re:

His comments after the Tour last year really did it for me.

Sorry but I just hate posts like this. Thats exactly like the people who say Schleck was a boring rider because he complained about descents and cobbles. Yeah, its pretty stupid to complain about that, I agree, but did these comments change the way he rode? He did attack on stages with downhill finishes and he even attacked on the cobbles stage in the tour 2010 (I don't want to have a discussion if this attack was right because Contador was caught in a crash, but he did attack, thats a fact) so only because he said something stupid it didnt change the way he rode.

Same with Quintana. Since he said that he wants to ride more conservatively he absolutely always gets criticized for it. He was the freakin first who attacked on the climb last week and still people say he rode too defensive. That just doesnt make any sense at all. And even in the tour last year he only made a big tactical mistake in one single stage (La Toussuire) because in the other stages he did attack, even on penultimate climbs, but he just wasnt strong enough to drop Froome. I'm not saying that he is the most aggressive rider ever, but he simply isnt more defensive than 90% of all other gc riders.

Since Quintana's victory at Val Martello in 2014, he hasn't put in any long range attacks - at least none of note. His speciality is attacking 5-10k from the line, sometimes 3k then attacking, putting if he's good 30-40 seconds into his rivals. Against a top Froome or Contador he'd get 10-20 seconds on a good day. Even on Stage 20 if the Tour when he had nothing to lose and everything to gain, he put in a mild half-hearted (if that) attack on the Croix de Fer. Then he took it up on the Alpe, but it was way too little too late.

Out of the top GT riders I'd say he's the most conservative. He used to be great, attacking from everywhere and anywhere (in the 2013 Tour and that Dauphine stage) but now he isn't. What changed? Look at Froome, Contador, Nibali. They haven't done this progression; if anything, they went the other way.

He did nothing wrong in stage 20 of the tour. His attack on the Croix de Fer might even have been successful but he had to go together with Valverde because of the long descent and the flat part before the Alpe, but Valverde just wasnt strong enough. On Alp d'Huez itself he also went at the beginning of the climb but Froome's domestiques brought him back two times.
As I said he made one big mistake in the La Toussuire stage because there he really could have won the tour if he had gone for a long range attack. In every other one week stage race long range attacks are usually pretty useless because his disadvantages are never that big. For example Froome also never does long range attacks but people say he is a very aggressive rider. (The attack on the penultimate climb in the Romandie this week doesnt count because he was already far back in the gc. That was never the case with Quintana)

 

[Red Rick]

Attacking the last part of the CdF was never gonna work. He was alone against Froome, the way better rouleur, 10s behind, who 3 other teammates less than a minute back.

The plan should've been to have teammates and colombians in the breakaway, wreck the peloton on the early and hardest part of the CdF and then bridge up to those teammates and colombians on top of the climb, with hopefully Froome having fewer teammates and allies over the CdF than Quintana had.

 

[Mr.White]

Re: Re:

His comments after the Tour last year really did it for me.

Sorry but I just hate posts like this. Thats exactly like the people who say Schleck was a boring rider because he complained about descents and cobbles. Yeah, its pretty stupid to complain about that, I agree, but did these comments change the way he rode? He did attack on stages with downhill finishes and he even attacked on the cobbles stage in the tour 2010 (I don't want to have a discussion if this attack was right because Contador was caught in a crash, but he did attack, thats a fact) so only because he said something stupid it didnt change the way he rode.

Same with Quintana. Since he said that he wants to ride more conservatively he absolutely always gets criticized for it. He was the freakin first who attacked on the climb last week and still people say he rode too defensive. That just doesnt make any sense at all. And even in the tour last year he only made a big tactical mistake in one single stage (La Toussuire) because in the other stages he did attack, even on penultimate climbs, but he just wasnt strong enough to drop Froome. I'm not saying that he is the most aggressive rider ever, but he simply isnt more defensive than 90% of all other gc riders.

Since Quintana's victory at Val Martello in 2014, he hasn't put in any long range attacks - at least none of note. His speciality is attacking 5-10k from the line, sometimes 3k then attacking, putting if he's good 30-40 seconds into his rivals. Against a top Froome or Contador he'd get 10-20 seconds on a good day. Even on Stage 20 if the Tour when he had nothing to lose and everything to gain, he put in a mild half-hearted (if that) attack on the Croix de Fer. Then he took it up on the Alpe, but it was way too little too late.

Out of the top GT riders I'd say he's the most conservative. He used to be great, attacking from everywhere and anywhere (in the 2013 Tour and that Dauphine stage) but now he isn't. What changed? Look at Froome, Contador, Nibali. They haven't done this progression; if anything, they went the other way.

What changed is the fact that in 2013, before the Tour, he was just promising young rider, and he was allowed to attack (by this I mean nobody of the big guns marked him). Things changed after Mont Ventoux...

 

[Tonton]

Instead of revisiting history, let's look at cold hard FACTS:

In '16, Catalunya and Romandie, Quitana has been rock-solid. Pais Vasco? One so-so day. Not much of a loss, and overall down by a handful of seconds. I'm staring to believe that he can win the Tour. Team strength and tactics will be everything. If you let Sky do their thing and react, ask Ullrich: you're the runner-up. Sky will bring a steam roller and lesser teams will come down to Earth, i.e. FDJ. Movistar can somewhat match, alliances will play a role. This could be a Tour for the ages...

There's nothing to learn from the past. Will the aging Bertie pull it? Will Nairito do it? Will Froome deliver? Could a dark horse (Aru, Pinot) throw a wrench into the script? I can't wait.

 

[AlexNYC]

What some posters refer to as boring, I see as cerebral. I think this is one of Nairo's strenghts and precisely what could make him an all-time great one day. The way he rides is pretty much the only way to win multiple GTs in the same year nowadays.

 

[SeriousSam]

Instead of revisiting history, let's look at cold hard FACTS:

In '16, Catalunya and Romandie, Quitana has been rock-solid. Pais Vasco? One so-so day. Not much of a loss, and overall down by a handful of seconds. I'm staring to believe that he can win the Tour. Team strength and tactics will be everything. If you let Sky do their thing and react, ask Ullrich: you're the runner-up. Sky will bring a steam roller and lesser teams will come down to Earth, i.e. FDJ. Movistar can somewhat match, alliances will play a role. This could be a Tour for the ages...

You underestimate the extent to which raw wattage matters when faced with team as strong as Postal/Sky. In __/ stages there's nothing anyone can do. The mountain train guarantees that the strongest climber wins and maximises the damage caused to weaker rivals by stretching the portion of the climb done at or above limit. That's why the gaps at PSM and Ax3 were astronomical.

Tactics wise, the most important factor for Movistar is not to *** it up and enter the mountains with an insurmountable 2 minute deficit.

 

[Tonton]

Instead of revisiting history, let's look at cold hard FACTS:

In '16, Catalunya and Romandie, Quitana has been rock-solid. Pais Vasco? One so-so day. Not much of a loss, and overall down by a handful of seconds. I'm staring to believe that he can win the Tour. Team strength and tactics will be everything. If you let Sky do their thing and react, ask Ullrich: you're the runner-up. Sky will bring a steam roller and lesser teams will come down to Earth, i.e. FDJ. Movistar can somewhat match, alliances will play a role. This could be a Tour for the ages...

You underestimate the extent to which raw wattage matters when faced with team as strong as Postal/Sky. In __/ stages there's nothing anyone can do. The mountain train guarantees that the strongest climber wins and maximises the damage caused to weaker rivals by stretching the portion of the climb done at or above limit. That's why the gaps at PSM and Ax3 were astronomical.

Tactics wise, the most important factor for Movistar is not to **** it up and enter the mountains with an insurmountable 2 minute deficit.

That's a very good point you're making (as always I must add). And I thought I touched on that. That's why Pinot will not win the TdF. But teamwise, unlike Tinkov, Movistar can (more or less) match Sky. Somehow, Quintana and Bertie need to collude. Otherwise, they will fight for second.

 

[Cannibal72]

Re:

What some posters refer to as boring, I see as cerebral. I think this is one of Nairo's strenghts and precisely what could make him an all-time great one day. The way he rides is pretty much the only way to win multiple GTs in the same year nowadays.

I don't think the equation of conservative and cerebral that seems so prevalent is really fair. In Kuiper's words, good tactics are finishing your opponent's plate before you start your own; Quintana's and Valverde's tactics (in particular) seem to be to watch your opponents eating and then push your own plate aside without touching it, but the actual consumption of food/use of energy are just as important in the original formulation as forcing your rivals to use their own. Someone like Gerrans has used tactics that I wouldn't describe as smart but which are very pragmatic and workmanlike to win 2 monuments that he probably wasn't the strongest rider in; my objection to Quintana is that he uses dull and workmanlike tactics which are unsuited to him and thus don't work. Given Froome's and Sky's third week problems in 2015, a smart rider sitting a short way back wins that bike race. Nairo didn't, and that's that.

 

[Escarabajo]

I think the main reason for such widespread complaining about his racing style comes as a result of it not meeting many people's expectations.

Many expected that alongside the obvious and undoubted talent, he also possesses the ultraattacking spirit of the Colombian escarabajos of old. It has turned out that this is not the case. The result is that disillusioned fans are seeing his racing style as almost the second coming of Leipheimer. Such comparison would obviously be ridiculous, as in reality Quintana is no more conservative than your average GC rider.
The only big GC rider we have seen risking losing a podium place in the quest for victory is Contador. Compared to everyone else, Nairo doesn't stand out as excessively conservative wheelsucker as one would make out from a large number of posts talking about him on this board.

About last Tour, we will probably never know how much Valverdes desire to get to the final podium in Paris influenced Movistar tactics. But the way their respective racing schedules are done this year is quite telling in itself.

Well said.

People have unrealistic expectations if they expect him to blow up the race from afar whenever there is a mountain on the route.

The comparison with Contador is interesting but a bit unfair IMO. Contador has won so much that he can afford to risk a 2nd place for the victory since a podium place in a gt is nothing special for him. I doubt Contador would risk a podium place in the Tour and go all out for the win when he was 25 years old.

Did you ever watch tour 2007?

I don't remember Contador attacking from far away in 2007.

 

[Escarabajo]

Re: Re:

His comments after the Tour last year really did it for me.

Sorry but I just hate posts like this. Thats exactly like the people who say Schleck was a boring rider because he complained about descents and cobbles. Yeah, its pretty stupid to complain about that, I agree, but did these comments change the way he rode? He did attack on stages with downhill finishes and he even attacked on the cobbles stage in the tour 2010 (I don't want to have a discussion if this attack was right because Contador was caught in a crash, but he did attack, thats a fact) so only because he said something stupid it didnt change the way he rode.

Same with Quintana. Since he said that he wants to ride more conservatively he absolutely always gets criticized for it. He was the freakin first who attacked on the climb last week and still people say he rode too defensive. That just doesnt make any sense at all. And even in the tour last year he only made a big tactical mistake in one single stage (La Toussuire) because in the other stages he did attack, even on penultimate climbs, but he just wasnt strong enough to drop Froome. I'm not saying that he is the most aggressive rider ever, but he simply isnt more defensive than 90% of all other gc riders.

Since Quintana's victory at Val Martello in 2014, he hasn't put in any long range attacks - at least none of note. His speciality is attacking 5-10k from the line, sometimes 3k then attacking, putting if he's good 30-40 seconds into his rivals. Against a top Froome or Contador he'd get 10-20 seconds on a good day. Even on Stage 20 if the Tour when he had nothing to lose and everything to gain, he put in a mild half-hearted (if that) attack on the Croix de Fer. Then he took it up on the Alpe, but it was way too little too late.

Out of the top GT riders I'd say he's the most conservative. He used to be great, attacking from everywhere and anywhere (in the 2013 Tour and that Dauphine stage) but now he isn't. What changed? Look at Froome, Contador, Nibali. They haven't done this progression; if anything, they went the other way.

I disagree with you. He put a hard attack on Croix de Fer. Besides he needed Valverde for the descent and flat. That was when it went wrong. There was no other option. For the million time his error was the day before. He tried hard on stage 20th. It was too late.

 

[IndianCyclist]

All tactics become irrelevant if you lose 2 mins in the first week especially when tours are won with <1min. Good positioning & teamwork is critical for not getting stuck behind or crashing. Not only are you physically affected due to the work done but mentally demoralized as well.

 

[CheckMyPecs]

Re:

All tactics become irrelevant if you lose 2 mins in the first week especially when tours are won with <1min. Good positioning & teamwork is critical for not getting stuck behind or crashing. Not only are you physically affected due to the work done but mentally demoralized as well.

Only pussies let morale affect their performance.

 

[dacooley]

the forumboard gets more and more obsessed with long range attacks

 

[Red Rick]

Contador attacked like 40k out on the Galibier, dropped everyone, got a flat on the descent.

The point is not that riders have to attack from 50+ km.

The point is they should try to, when that is the tactic with the best chance of winning.

 

[Escarabajo]

Re:

Contador attacked like 40k out on the Galibier, dropped everyone, got a flat on the descent.

The point is not that riders have to attack from 50+ km.

The point is they should try to, when that is the tactic with the best chance of winning.

Quintana attacked from further away on his first Tour. Once he became a threat everything changed. That was the point people were trying to make here.

 

[Escarabajo]

Re:

the forumboard gets more and more obsessed with long range attacks

+1.

Once you are a real GC contender they become worthless. You can get away with it if they don't know the rider. But that's it. And TBH that last one that actually stuck and almost did some damage was done by Andy Schleck in 2012. And even that he had accumulated some lost time also.

 

[hrotha]

Re: Re:

the forumboard gets more and more obsessed with long range attacks

+1.

Once you are a real GC contender they become worthless. You can get away with it if they don't know the rider. But that's it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ys0KdeZHtq0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QWcyrvtOBc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqCzDxAqqAQ

 

[SeriousSam]

It's a very situational move requiring the right stage and that the rider contemplating it is the strongest, or very close to the strongest and that the domestiques of the attacked riders aren't too strong. And because of the heightened blow up risk, that the attacker is behind.

So yeah, almost never a good idea.