Teams & Riders Nairo Quintana discussion thread

[portugal11]

Re: Re:

Even without his Tour win, Ulle was still a greater rider than Heras and Simoni. I think it's quite clear that Quintana is on another level than Andy.

Andy had 3x2nd in the Tour, 2nd in the Giro and a Liege win.
Quintana has 2x2nd in the Tour and a 3rd, a Giro and Vuelta win, Itzulia, Tirreno, Catalunya and Romandie. And is only almost 27...

Andy had a terrible crash at age of 27.... of course quintana has a better palmares than andy but i still think that andy was a better climber and a better gc man than quintana

GC-man? Quintana is a much more proven general classification rider than Andy ever was. Andy was a much better classics rider tho.

In terms of palmares, i agree with you, quintana has 2 gt's meanwhile andy has...zero!!! Tell me, why you think that quintana is a better gc man than andy?(forget the palmares).

 

[manolo57]

Re: Re:

Even without his Tour win, Ulle was still a greater rider than Heras and Simoni. I think it's quite clear that Quintana is on another level than Andy.

Andy had 3x2nd in the Tour, 2nd in the Giro and a Liege win.
Quintana has 2x2nd in the Tour and a 3rd, a Giro and Vuelta win, Itzulia, Tirreno, Catalunya and Romandie. And is only almost 27...

Andy had a terrible crash at age of 27.... of course quintana has a better palmares than andy but i still think that andy was a better climber and a better gc man than quintana

GC-man? Quintana is a much more proven general classification rider than Andy ever was. Andy was a much better classics rider tho.

In terms of palmares, i agree with you, quintana has 2 gt's meanwhile andy has...zero!!! Tell me, why you think that quintana is a better gc man than andy?(forget the palmares).

Forget the palmares ??

There are some very strange person on this forum.

 

[portugal11]

Re: Re:

Even without his Tour win, Ulle was still a greater rider than Heras and Simoni. I think it's quite clear that Quintana is on another level than Andy.

Andy had 3x2nd in the Tour, 2nd in the Giro and a Liege win.
Quintana has 2x2nd in the Tour and a 3rd, a Giro and Vuelta win, Itzulia, Tirreno, Catalunya and Romandie. And is only almost 27...

Andy had a terrible crash at age of 27.... of course quintana has a better palmares than andy but i still think that andy was a better climber and a better gc man than quintana

GC-man? Quintana is a much more proven general classification rider than Andy ever was. Andy was a much better classics rider tho.

In terms of palmares, i agree with you, quintana has 2 gt's meanwhile andy has...zero!!! Tell me, why you think that quintana is a better gc man than andy?(forget the palmares).

Forget the palmares ??

There are some very strange person on this forum.

Andy could easily have win a giro or a vuelta. Nibali has more gt's than froome and he already won all gt's but i think that froome is clearly stronger than nibali in gt's.

 

[sir fly]

Netserk really has serious issues with great Andy Schleck.
The man has retired 3 years ago, but Netserk is still trying to belittle him.. Just can't get over.

Let it go, kid.
You've already broken your teeth on hatred towards Andy Schleck.

 

[Netserk]

Sorry, I just can't help myself nor control my bile, sirfly.

Andy is untouched by the hatred though and can relax and enjoy life.

 

[sir fly]

Re:

Sorry, I just can't help myself nor control my bile, sirfly.

Andy is untouched by the hatred though and can relax and enjoy life.

Exactly.
And no one should try to deny the occurrence of the character brought an exceptional quality along.

 

[bassano]

Re: Re:

If quintana presumes he will be weaker than froome, then this is definitely a smart thing to do. Instead of one unlikely shot at the tour he has a decent shot at the giro plus a far fetched yet possible shot at the tour. The strongest rider does not win every time.

But the bottom line is this: No sense using the old losing platform if the fundamentals, ie relative strengths of the top contenders, have not been altered much.

The other option would be racing the tour differently, of course. But I don't see it happening.

Agreed, would be a very smart move by Quintana. The Giro is still a really big deal after all. Unfortunately, although smart by Quintana, it's rubbish for fans as it will probably ruin two GTs as much of a contest. Quintana on decent form will be untouchable in the Giro, and, with Quintana tired, there will be no-one close to Froome's level in the Tour.

Do not think so, if quintana would like to win giro, he should peak there, otherwise he will be smashed there it is not so easy as Vuelta when everybody is tired or not as motivated as should be and still last year on tour quintana was not real challenge for froome anyway nobody was

 

[hrotha]

Andy won a Tour. Deal with it, haters.

 

[Mr.White]

Re:

Andy won a Tour. Deal with it, haters.

He didn't won anything, he was given a victory, that's not the same. Anyway, what hate? Are you suggesting he is better than riders named above? I don't think so

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re: Re:

Even without his Tour win, Ulle was still a greater rider than Heras and Simoni. I think it's quite clear that Quintana is on another level than Andy.

Andy had 3x2nd in the Tour, 2nd in the Giro and a Liege win.
Quintana has 2x2nd in the Tour and a 3rd, a Giro and Vuelta win, Itzulia, Tirreno, Catalunya and Romandie. And is only almost 27...

Andy had a terrible crash at age of 27.... of course quintana has a better palmares than andy but i still think that andy was a better climber and a better gc man than quintana

GC-man? Quintana is a much more proven general classification rider than Andy ever was. Andy was a much better classics rider tho.

In terms of palmares, i agree with you, quintana has 2 gt's meanwhile andy has...zero!!! Tell me, why you think that quintana is a better gc man than andy?(forget the palmares).

GC stands for general classification, GT stands for Grand Tours.
You can't forget the palmarés, Andy haven't won a single stage race, hence why Quintana is a much, much better GC-rider than Andy ever was due to Quintana being much more consistent than Andy.

 

[Red Rick]

I feel like Schleck and Quintana are about equally talented pure climbing wise. Schleck was very consistent when he actually peaked for a race, and definitely more likely to initiate long range moves in his target races. Schleck was also a better one day racer, but mentally he was super vulnerable. As soon as he was gifted his Tour victory, he was done and dusted in his head.

It's crazy to realize that Schleck is actually younger than both Nibali and Froome.

 

[Netserk]

Re:

I feel like Schleck and Quintana are about equally talented pure climbing wise. Schleck was very consistent when he actually peaked for a race, and definitely more likely to initiate long range moves in his target races. Schleck was also a better one day racer, but mentally he was super vulnerable. As soon as he was gifted his Tour victory, he was done and dusted in his head.

It's crazy to realize that Schleck is actually younger than both Nibali and Froome.

Depending on where you draw the line, Izoard was the only one, no? Quintana initiated on Croix-de-Fer (and Stelvio )

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

I feel like Schleck and Quintana are about equally talented pure climbing wise. Schleck was very consistent when he actually peaked for a race, and definitely more likely to initiate long range moves in his target races. Schleck was also a better one day racer, but mentally he was super vulnerable. As soon as he was gifted his Tour victory, he was done and dusted in his head.

It's crazy to realize that Schleck is actually younger than both Nibali and Froome.

Depending on where you draw the line, Izoard was the only one, no? Quintana initiated on Croix-de-Fer (and Stelvio )

Schleck also went into breakways in the Pyrenees in '09. Moves that were as doomed as Quintana's CdF move, but team tactics for that move were just so wrong it was doomed to fail.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re:

I feel like Schleck and Quintana are about equally talented pure climbing wise. Schleck was very consistent when he actually peaked for a race, and definitely more likely to initiate long range moves in his target races. Schleck was also a better one day racer, but mentally he was super vulnerable. As soon as he was gifted his Tour victory, he was done and dusted in his head.

It's crazy to realize that Schleck is actually younger than both Nibali and Froome.

Definitely more likely to initiate long range moves; are you basing that on only L-B-L 09 and Galibier? Andy was just that much better than everyone in 09 and had to attack from afar on Galibier due to how they chose to ride the Pyrenees. Both extremely good performances, but I won't remember Andy as an agressive rider, really. Quintana has some longe range attacks to his name as well, as a matter of fact, Grand Tour winning attacks. I also remember him riding a very aggressively TdF 2013.

Yes, of course Andy was consistent when he peaked since it was the only raced he cared about. Im talking about consistency throughout a whole season which is something entirely different. Base level, seriousness, fatigue etc.

Also, Quintana is a better time trialist than Andy. I don't remember Andy ever doing well in a week long stage race.

 

[ice&fire]

Re:

I feel like Schleck and Quintana are about equally talented pure climbing wise. Schleck was very consistent when he actually peaked for a race, and definitely more likely to initiate long range moves in his target races. Schleck was also a better one day racer, but mentally he was super vulnerable. As soon as he was gifted his Tour victory, he was done and dusted in his head.

It's crazy to realize that Schleck is actually younger than both Nibali and Froome.

To be fair his Tour victory was gifted in early 2012 and he crashed in the Dauphiné that year before he was able to ride another GT. We'll never know for sure how much of his results afterwards were due to his mental weakness and to his physical injuries.

 

[Red Rick]

Forgot about the Romme-Colombiere stage in 2009. Schleck's sample size for GTs in which he actually peaked is tiny though. Andy waiting around for Frank in 2011 had a similar effect to Quintana not jeopardizing Valverde in 2015. In their Tour history they're quit similar in going up against an equal climber with a better TT. Biggest difference really is that Schleck never really tried in the Giro or Vuelta after showing his talent, and that he quit trying after he was handed a Tour victory.

I disagree about the tt'ing, as Quintana has had one season where he TT'd well in the shorter stage races, but it didn't show in those GT's.

All in all, it doesn't matter of course as Schleck is long retired, but I would've loved it had Schleck still been competitive in GTs these days.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re:

Forgot about the Romme-Colombiere stage in 2009. Schleck's sample size for GTs in which he actually peaked is tiny though. Andy waiting around for Frank in 2011 had a similar effect to Quintana not jeopardizing Valverde in 2015. In their Tour history they're quit similar in going up against an equal climber with a better TT. Biggest difference really is that Schleck never really tried in the Giro or Vuelta after showing his talent, and that he quit trying after he was handed a Tour victory.

I disagree about the tt'ing, as Quintana has had one season where he TT'd well in the shorter stage races, but it didn't show in those GT's.

All in all, it doesn't matter of course as Schleck is long retired, but I would've loved it had Schleck still been competitive in GTs these days.

Just arguing that saying Schleck was definitely more likely to initiate long range attacks really is factually long and biased. They are both, despite being climbers and going up against a superior time trialist as you note, relatively conservative all things considered. For good and worse.

Quintana is defending himself well in the time trial, Andy never did apart from that one good time trial in TdF 2010. I can't see there is should be an argument here: just look at Quintana's time trial placing from 2014-2016. Andy was no Michael Rasmussen, but at times pretty darn close when it came to time trials. You can't use TdF last year as an indicator as that would also indicate he is nothing more than a good climber either. Burgos 2015, Calp last year, Burgos 2014, Route du Sud 2016, Romandie 2016, Barolo 2014... Andy never did that.

 

[Netserk]

Re: Re:

Forgot about the Romme-Colombiere stage in 2009. Schleck's sample size for GTs in which he actually peaked is tiny though. Andy waiting around for Frank in 2011 had a similar effect to Quintana not jeopardizing Valverde in 2015. In their Tour history they're quit similar in going up against an equal climber with a better TT. Biggest difference really is that Schleck never really tried in the Giro or Vuelta after showing his talent, and that he quit trying after he was handed a Tour victory.

I disagree about the tt'ing, as Quintana has had one season where he TT'd well in the shorter stage races, but it didn't show in those GT's.

All in all, it doesn't matter of course as Schleck is long retired, but I would've loved it had Schleck still been competitive in GTs these days.

Just arguing that saying Schleck was definitely more likely to initiate long range attacks really is factually long and biased. They are both, despite being climbers and going up against a superior time trialist as you note, relatively conservative all things considered. For good and worse.

Quintana is defending himself well in the time trial, Andy never did apart from that one good time trial in TdF 2010. I can't see there is should be an argument here: just look at Quintana's time trial placing from 2014-2016. Andy was no Michael Rasmussen, but at times pretty darn close when it came to time trials. You can't use TdF last year as an indicator as that would also indicate he is nothing more than a good climber either. Burgos 2015, Calp last year, Burgos 2014, Route du Sud 2016, Romandie 2016, Barolo 2014... Andy never did that.

Agreed. He never did as well as Rasmussen did here: http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=5741

 

[Valv.Piti]

Definitely true, but then MR had some less than stellar performances as well. I guess that only improves my point.

 

[Ricco']

Not sure if this double attempt ist a smart decision. His chances in July will definitely be smaller and winning the giro won't be easy as well, especially if he isn't at 100%. 2014 his only rivals were Uran (a mediocre gt rider) and a 24 year old Aru. This year there are Nibali, Landa, Aru, Kruijswijk, Mollema, Pinot and let's not underestimate Dumoulin. Who knows how much he improved.
Without a doubt Quintana is still a big favorite for this giro, but this isn't a double attempt like Contador's in 2015. Back then Contador knew that even if he wouldn't be in top shape in the tour because of the double attempt he would probably still win the giro because of the mediocre competition. This year however there is the danger that a not in top shape Quintana won't win the giro and then won't have a chance in the tour because of another gt in his legs.

keep in mind uran was a lot better than kruiswijk as well in the giro 2014 and have the same age.

Of course he was, Kruijswijk crashed on stage 6 and rode the next 2 days with a cracked shoulder before giving up.

 

[portugal11]

Andy and quintana are bad time trialists, quintana is lucky that parcours of the tour hasn't enough kilometers of time trials. If we go back 5/6 years ago, andy never had a tour with 15 km like quintana had in 2015, even in 2016, le tour had a mountai time trial, andy never had that chance, he would win le tour 2011 if the route was similar to 2015 or even 2016.

 

[portugal11]

But i agree with valv piti, quintana is good in whole season

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re:

Andy and quintana are bad time trialists, quintana is lucky that parcours of the tour hasn't enough kilometers of time trials. If we go back 5/6 years ago, andy never had a tour with 15 km like quintana had in 2015, even in 2016, le tour had a mountai time trial, andy never had that chance, he would win le tour 2011 if the route was similar to 2015 or even 2016.

2011 was very, very climber-biased as well and that time trial where he got his ass kicked was as hilly as the one in 2016. Not that it has anything to do with the point that Quintana simply is a better time trialer than Schleck which I honestly can't understand people like you and Red Rick maintain that he isn't. Oh well.

 

[Netserk]

In GTs, their TT ability is quite even. It's only really the Rotterdam prologue that sticks out.

 

[portugal11]

Re: Re:

Andy and quintana are bad time trialists, quintana is lucky that parcours of the tour hasn't enough kilometers of time trials. If we go back 5/6 years ago, andy never had a tour with 15 km like quintana had in 2015, even in 2016, le tour had a mountai time trial, andy never had that chance, he would win le tour 2011 if the route was similar to 2015 or even 2016.

2011 was very, very climber-biased as well and that time trial where he got his *** kicked was as hilly as the one in 2016. Not that it has anything to do with the point that Quintana simply is a better time trialer than Schleck which I honestly can't understand people like you and Red Rick maintain that he isn't. Oh well.

In 2016, the second time trial was almost a moutain time trial so i don't your point. Quintana never did a great time trial in gt's (he lost more than 2 minutes to uran in barolo...). But i still think quintana is slightly better than andy in time trials but he still is bad compared to others tour's winners (contador, froome, evans, wiggins, lance, etc).