Nibali at the same level as Froome/Contador?

[patrick767]

Absolutely he is.

Sorry if this has already been mentioned but he's doing that right now. Or is the composure and control to avoid needless crashes not an element of cycling? It's not just about wattage. Even so I believe either CF or AC would have to be at their absolute peak to beat Vincenzo on such consistent form.

This. A big part of the achievement of repeat TdF winners is staying out of trouble and having superior bike handling skills. There's some luck involved, but it's more than luck that Indurain avoided losing major time or crashing out entirely for 5 straight Tours, Armstrong for 7, etc.

Let's give Nibali credit. His bike handling is excellent and he's absolutely crushing the field.

 

[Publicus]

is it worth it to point out that nibali was already way ahead of both riders when they crashed out?

I don't think there is anything wrong with pointing out the obvious. I think the point that is under serious question is whether Nibali could actually ride with/limit his losses sufficiently through the Vosages, Alps and Pyrenees and maintain sufficient cushion to not get blown out by (a presumably healthy) Froome in the ITT and possibly nipped by Contador. Whatever one can say, at the last testing before the Tour, when NONE of the top contenders were in their peak Tour form, Nibali was a fair bit off the pace in the mountains. That doesn't mean he didn't close the gap (it's possible). It's also possible that Froome and Contador progress a bit more in their preparations as well.

A lot of suppositions and what ifs, but I think it's fair to say that where Nibali is, overall, relative to Froome and Contador in a 3 week race is very much an open and debatable question. Anyone suggesting otherwise is simply being disingenuous in my opinion.

 

[Netserk]

is it worth it to point out that nibali was already way ahead of both riders when they crashed out?

Since when is 2'' way ahead?

 

[SeriousSam]

I'm wondering whether there is anyone who actually, really believes Nibali will TT and climb as well as Contador and Froome in the next Grand Tour they compete in? Really?

I think he's going to get his *** kicked as per usual, though if there are cobbles in it and he smartly deploys his team to limit his inevitably massive losses and there isn't a long flat time trial, then, though of course an an underdog, he'd have a non-negligible chance of winning.

 

[spanky wanderlust]

I don't think there is anything wrong with pointing out the obvious. I think the point that is under serious question is whether Nibali could actually ride with/limit his losses sufficiently through the Vosages, Alps and Pyrenees and maintain sufficient cushion to not get blown out by (a presumably healthy) Froome in the ITT and possibly nipped by Contador. Whatever one can say, at the last testing before the Tour, when NONE of the top contenders were in their peak Tour form, Nibali was a fair bit off the pace in the mountains. That doesn't mean he didn't close the gap (it's possible). It's also possible that Froome and Contador progress a bit more in their preparations as well.

A lot of suppositions and what ifs, but I think it's fair to say that where Nibali is, overall, relative to Froome and Contador in a 3 week race is very much an open and debatable question. Anyone suggesting otherwise is simply being disingenuous in my opinion.

the contador/froome argument seems to me just a combination of 'moving goalposts' and 'no true scotsman'. nibali can't win.

if froome and contador were still in it, yet nibali held on to win by less than 2 minutes you would all say: oh, well, that's just the time he made up in the first week. that shouldn't really count. he's not a true champion.

there is no amount of evidence that would persuade 156 people that nibali is a true champion.

 

[Jspear]

No chance for Froome or Contador to beat Nibali in this tour, better for them they are out, this way their fans can still have sweet dreams about woulda coulda shoulda

You realize that comment goes both ways. VN fans can only dream that he would have beaten AC and Froome. It's a woulda coulda shoulda situation all the way around. This thread is purely speculative. So you can dream all you want, I KNOW what the outcome would have been if AC was here.

 

[spanky wanderlust]

Since when is 2'' way ahead?

in the first week of the tour?!

c'mon man. you're reaching now. 2+ min is a massive blow.

especially since we all saw the sheffield and arenberg stages. those were demonstrations of a champion.

 

[SeriousSam]

there is no amount of evidence that would persuade 156 people that nibali is a true champion.

We* consider Nibali a true and deserved champion, we just don't believe he's on Froome's and Contador's level.

Next time they all line for a grand tour with top form and the intention to win, Nibali will be a massive underdog once again with Froome and Contador regarded as the most likely winners, significantly more likely than Nibali (or anyone else, except perhaps Quintana)

*I can obviously only speak for myself being one of those 156

 

[Publicus]

in the first week of the tour?!

c'mon man. you're reaching now. 2+ min is a massive blow.

especially since we all saw the sheffield and arenberg stages. those were demonstrations of a champion.

Nibali only had 2" on Froome when he abandoned.

 

[spanky wanderlust]

Nibali only had 2" on Froome when he abandoned.

it's tough to say how much time exactly froome would have lost if he had continued. imo, it would have been substantial.

my opinion is that froome would not have won this tour no matter what. i don't think he had the form. so talking about him and contador as equals in terms of form is a little clunky from the start. i think contador would have shelled him.

i also think contador would have had his hands full clawing back 2 minutes on this version of nibali, even if beto was on the best form of his life.

people talk about the podium of frenchmen and valverde as discrediting nibali's form. if you are going to do that to try to convince others, it's really helpful NOT to point out that nibali is like 7 min ahead of them (too lazy to go and look at the actual gap right now).

it's also helpful to not point out that those frenchmen who apparently sukc so bad, are all ahead of many pre race favorites: jvdb, tjvg, tgbm, ltd, et al. all great bike riders on form, who are all grouped in behind these lousy frenchmen. the weak field argument doesn't hold a lot of water for me since nibali is absolutely crushing all of these guys without even digging very deep.

thoughts?

 

[Miburo]

Stage 8 said us enough about the competition. Contador did one push and everyone except nibali dropped and contador seemingly didn't break a sweat doing it.

Everyone else was fodder, 7 minutes doesn't mean that much and nibali already had 2+ min after cobbles.

 

[Publicus]

the contador/froome argument seems to me just a combination of 'moving goalposts' and 'no true scotsman'. nibali can't win.

if froome and contador were still in it, yet nibali held on to win by less than 2 minutes you would all say: oh, well, that's just the time he made up in the first week. that shouldn't really count. he's not a true champion.

there is no amount of evidence that would persuade 156 people that nibali is a true champion.

You're missing the point of my post. IMO, you can only speak, with any certainty/confidence, of what has transpired, not what WOULD have transpired. Anything more is mere speculation about an unknowable event IMO.

Also, I think there are two questions being debated: (1) is Nibali on Froome/Contador's level (which is frankly unknowable since frankly we don't even know if Contador is on Froome's level or vice versa) and (2) whether Nibali deserves this title (which to me is an unquestionable yes). As to the first question, we only have the Dauphine (and even then only up until Froome crashed) and the first 4 stages of this Tour as it relates to Froome, and the first eight as it relates to Contador. As to the second, you only race against the field that is present. Who is or is not present on the Champs Elysee, is really outside of Nibali's (or anyone's) control and it is unfair to him (and the race) to suggest otherwise.

 

[Publicus]

it's tough to say how much time exactly froome would have lost if he had continued. imo, it would have been substantial.

my opinion is that froome would not have won this tour no matter what. i don't think he had the form. so talking about him and contador as equals in terms of form is a little clunky from the start. i think contador would have shelled him.

i also think contador would have had his hands full clawing back 2 minutes on this version of nibali, even if beto was on the best form of his life.

people talk about the podium of frenchmen and valverde as discrediting nibali's form. if you are going to do that to try to convince others, it's really helpful NOT to point out that nibali is like 7 min ahead of them (too lazy to go and look at the actual gap right now).

it's also helpful to not point out that those frenchmen who apparently sukc so bad, are all ahead of many pre race favorites: jvdb, tjvg, tgbm, ltd, et al. all great bike riders on form, who are all grouped in behind these lousy frenchmen. the weak field argument doesn't hold a lot of water for me since nibali is absolutely crushing all of these guys without even digging very deep.

thoughts?

That you're arguments are as speculative as those arguing that Froome or Contador would have crushed Nibali.

 

[SeriousSam]

I think we can but a floor to how much time Froome would've lost. At least as much as Porte.

 

[Netserk]

in the first week of the tour?!

c'mon man. you're reaching now. 2+ min is a massive blow.

especially since we all saw the sheffield and arenberg stages. those were demonstrations of a champion.

2' = two minutes

2'' = two seconds

When Froome abandoned he was only 2'' behind in GC.

edit: Here's a reminder of what you wrote, emphasis mine:

is it worth it to point out that nibali was already way ahead of both riders when they crashed out?

 

[Jspear]

it's tough to say how much time exactly froome would have lost if he had continued. imo, it would have been substantial.

my opinion is that froome would not have won this tour no matter what. i don't think he had the form. so talking about him and contador as equals in terms of form is a little clunky from the start. i think contador would have shelled him.

i also think contador would have had his hands full clawing back 2 minutes on this version of nibali, even if beto was on the best form of his life.

people talk about the podium of frenchmen and valverde as discrediting nibali's form. if you are going to do that to try to convince others, it's really helpful NOT to point out that nibali is like 7 min ahead of them (too lazy to go and look at the actual gap right now).

it's also helpful to not point out that those frenchmen who apparently sukc so bad, are all ahead of many pre race favorites: jvdb, tjvg, tgbm, ltd, et al. all great bike riders on form, who are all grouped in behind these lousy frenchmen. the weak field argument doesn't hold a lot of water for me since nibali is absolutely crushing all of these guys without even digging very deep.

thoughts?

I can't speak for anyone else, but I never considered these riders as pre-race favorites. The only three I considered as favorites were CF, AC, and VN. The guys you've listed I considered (and they considered themselves as such) as top 10 contenders. That was it. And on top of that I only considered them as top 10 contenders based on them having a trouble free 3 weeks. Several of the ones you named have been involved in crashes, ect.

This is a "weak" field if you think about those who are not here. This is not Nibali's fault, this doesn't take away from his win, but it is a fact nonetheless. Of course congratulations to Nibali for his win, staying upright, dealing with the pressures of the yellow jersey for so long, and winning his 1st Tour. Winning the Tour is not only about brute strength. He had the perfect combo of strength, skill, mental strength, and luck.

 

[Inquitus]

We never got to find out, but when they have all raced together Nibali doesn't hold a candle to Froome and Contador, so we can assume he wouldn't have here, hopefully next year we get to find out one way or the other for sure.

 

[Vino attacks everyone]

We never got to find out, but when they have all raced together Nibali doesn't hold a candle to Froome and Contador, so we can assume he wouldn't have here, hopefully next year we get to find out one way or the other for sure.

when they have all raced togeheter this year.
Last year he spanked their little bottoms big time in TA.
Not his fault that he can't stay in top shape from march to July like them.
Comparisons from warm up races are stupid anyways. Nibalis form now vs Dauphine has improved quite clearly wouldn't you agree?

 

[spanky wanderlust]

2' = two minutes

2'' = two seconds

When Froome abandoned he was only 2'' behind in GC.

edit: Here's a reminder of what you wrote, emphasis mine:

ok. fair enough. let's get nitpicky, then. you started it.

when froome crawled into the team car he was countless minutes back on the road, way more than two.

how much time would he have lost had he not crashed that second time? no one can say. but it would have been more than 2 minutes.

it's irrelevant to me. as i said, i believe froome would have gotten shelled by both nibs and ac.

in terms of form/strength, i'd rank them contador >= nibali >>> froome

 

[Netserk]

ok. fair enough. let's get nitpicky, then. you started it.

when froome crawled into the team car he was countless minutes back on the road, way more than two.

how much time would he have lost had he not crashed that second time? no one can say. but it would have been more than 2 minutes.

it's irrelevant to me. as i said, i believe froome would have gotten shelled by both nibs and ac.

in terms of form/strength, i'd rank them contador >= nibali >>> froome

Awesome logic!

So if the yellow jersey crashes out and waits a couple of minutes before abandoning that means that the 2nd place rider was way ahead when the yellow jersey crashed out. Cool story bro!

 

[BlurryVII]

when they have all raced togeheter this year.
Last year he spanked their little bottoms big time in TA.
Not his fault that he can't stay in top shape from march to July like them.
Comparisons from warm up races are stupid anyways. Nibalis form now vs Dauphine has improved quite clearly wouldn't you agree?

Contador in TA last year (which is really the only exemple in favor of nibali in his entire career, & which you'll keep mentioning over and over again) was miles from being in top shape as well.
What if it happened with AC being in his TA 2014 form? Not the same story at all.

Comparisons from past GT's can also be done as well. It really isn't in the advantage of Nibali.
Nibali deserves to win this tdf amongst the remaining rivals. That's for sure. It doesn"t go further than this, no point in bringing AC and CF into the tour discussion anymore.

 

[Afrank]

2' = two minutes

2'' = two seconds

When Froome abandoned he was only 2'' behind in GC.

edit: Here's a reminder of what you wrote, emphasis mine:

Do you think Froome would have hung with Nibali on the cobbles?

If Contador (who I would consider a much better bike handler) couldn't do it, what chance would Foome have had?

 

[Netserk]

Do you think Froome would have hung with Nibali on the cobbles?

If Contador (who I would consider a much better bike handler) couldn't do it, what chance would Foome have had?

Ofc not, but that's not the point. Nibali wasn't far ahead of Froome when Froome crashed out, just like he wasn't far ahead of Cavendish (who also would've lost a lot of time on the cobbles) when he crashed out.

 

[Publicus]

when they have all raced togeheter this year.
Last year he spanked their little bottoms big time in TA.
Not his fault that he can't stay in top shape from march to July like them.
Comparisons from warm up races are stupid anyways. Nibalis form now vs Dauphine has improved quite clearly wouldn't you agree?

Well he had his bottom spanked by both of them at the Dauphine (prior to Froome's injury) and arguably NONE of them were in top form when it happened. It's easy to excuse his performance after the fact in that manner by pointing to his Tour form, but you can't then conversely claim that neither Froome nor Contador improved over their Dauphine form in equal or possibly greater amounts, which I think is an equally plausible/likely fact. Unfortunately we never got to see which of the three improved more between then and the Tour.

 

[spanky wanderlust]

Awesome logic!

So if the yellow jersey crashes out and waits a couple of minutes before abandoning that means that the 2nd place rider was way ahead when the yellow jersey crashed out. Cool story bro!

if you have to nitpick and take a nasty tone then i assume you've run out of intelligent arguments to make.

froome was already gapped on the road when he crashed out. how much time he would have lost is unknowable. what is knowable is that nibali was stronger than him.

do you have anything to add that addresses this point?