Philipe Gilbert Future Tour de France Champion

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Must not have been watching Milan-San Remo in 2005-2007. Almost won in 2007. I know it's not a hilly classic, but to escape on the Poggio after a long race does say you're at your best in the hills.

Milan San Remo and Paris Tours are no hilly classics. They are easy long flat classics with some hills at the end.

Time and time again he proved in those years he came up short on hard hilly courses, which is what I'm talking about
In Milan San Remo a lot of young guys do well. Look at Offredo for instance. Or Langeveld leading up the entire poggio 2 years back. So I completely disagree with the bolded part and actually have to laugh out loud about that

Sorry, I don't even RATE performances up MSR and PT as standard for hilly classics.

And what's the use dragging Mollema into this? Seems everytime you're bitten in yr behind when somebody says something not completely 100% lyrical about Gilbert
Reminds me of

 

[El Pistolero]

Time and time again, he didn't enter Lombardia.

Time and time again, he was in breakaways at LBL.

Uran and Kreiziger are also youngsters and did well in LBL. I guess that doesn't count because I don't rate performances in LBL

Ps: rewatch WC 2007.

And the reason I'm dragging him in is because you hype him even though he showed way less than Gilbert at the same age.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Time and time again, he was simply dropped in Amstel Gold Race and time and time again he was simply dropped in LBL
Stop making stupid excuses. Before 2009 he was simply not good enough. For some riders it takes time until they enter their best years
There's no shame in that. Yet you somehow go on the defensive.
Typical Pistoletje

 

[El Pistolero]

No, you're just wrong. It's that simple.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GkgTrqZLD8

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Ah, fantastic argument. "You're wrong"

The usual when you don't have anything else left.

I see that as definitive proof I'm right. Good discussion. Thanks for admitting you were wrong.

 

[El Pistolero]

The argument is in the vid. Thought you'd figure that one out already.

1 Paolo Bettini Italië 6u 44'43"
2 Aleksandr Kolobnev Rusland z.t.
3 Stefan Schumacher Duitsland z.t.
4 Fränk Schleck Luxemburg z.t.
5 Cadel Evans Australië z.t.
6 Davide Rebellin Italië + 6"
7 Samuel Sánchez Spanje + 8"
8 Philippe Gilbert België z.t

Yeah, he just popped up in the hilly classics in 2009

He's the youngest of that group.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Ah, one of your other strong points, misinterpreting nearly every post you read.

I said he reached the TOP in hilly classics in 2009 and wasn't good enough before that.
What does a 8th place in the World 2008 prove in that?

Should I say Thomas Dekker was top in hilly classics because he was 5th, 5th and 6th in the Ardennes in 2008

Try again *yawn*

 

[El Pistolero]

I must say Armstrong won a lot of hilly classics as a top hilly classics ace

And it was in 2007

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Well he did win something called

THE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS
at age 21

But yeah, that doesn't count as proof, an 8th place in the World Championships when your name is Gilbert however, does count!

got ya, caught in your own words.
You're as easy as an ugly British girl.
This dicussion has been won. Good night

 

[El Pistolero]

Well he did win something called

THE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS
at age 21

But yeah, that doesn't count as proof, an 8th place in the World Championships when your name is Gilbert however, does count!

got ya, caught in your own words.
You're as easy as an ugly British girl.
This dicussion has been won. Good night

No you said he was ace at hilly classics You'd expect an ace in hilly classics to actually win a few wouldn't you? You know, Ace the best card? Aka the best of the best.

"Only since 2009 did he finally do well at hilly classics. Before that he was not good enough."

^ That were your words. I call an 8th place in the worlds at age 24 pretty good.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

The thing is, he was 25 in 2007, and finished in the same group as other hilly classic aces such as Martin Elmiger

For crying out loud.
Finishing in the group behind the winners group is what I said, not good enough. He wasn't good enough till 2009. FACT

I'm a Gilbert fan but guys like you make it hard to keep liking him. Stubborn fool

 

[El Pistolero]

The thing is, he was 25 in 2007, and finished in the same group as other hilly classic aces such as Martin Elmiger

For crying out loud.
Finishing in the group behind the winners group is what I said, not good enough. He wasn't good enough till 2009. FACT

No you said he hadn't done anything good in hilly classics till 2009. Besides you can find a donkey in practically every classics top 10 or Worlds. Fail to see what that proofs.

And while you might think Milan-San Remo 2007 is not an indication towards the hilly classics, I definitely think it is.

Because you're not good enough to win doesn't mean you haven't done well in some high profile races before

 

[The Hitch]

I find it amazing, that only 2 weeks after Gilberts 4 classics in a row, Pisti is able to frame an argument about how great Gilbert is that he loses.

Here are a few points though.

1 The reason why "its been done before" is not clinic, or not fully clinic. I suppose its clinic in so far as people dope less now than they did then but an explenation that should also be taken into account is that there are more specialists now. 2 generations ago Hinault could win Roubaix and TDF. 1 generation ago Lance, Jallabert, could win classics and then gts. This generation, there are more people who specialise just in climbing, and more in just classics. Its far more difficult to beat gt riders when Igor Anton or Ezequiel Mosquera spend the entire season building up to the Vuelta 3rd week.

2 To those who point to Di Luca and Valverde and Lance as examples well
a Valverde was podiuming gts before he was podiuming top classics. I suppose Contador who has a 3rd in FW is also a hilly classics rider turned gt ace
b Lance had a Vuelta podium and 2 Tour titles at Gilberts current age. Di Luca though was in a similar position to what Gilbert is now.
c All 3 won major hilly one dayers at a way younger age than Gilbert. Dekker is right, Gilbert was good but meh pre 2009. He sure has had a miraculous coming of age these last 2 years. Now if he was named Fabian Cancellara or Sebastian Roessler or Michael Kwiatkowski there would be a lot of sarcastic comments about his new found ability but apparently its perfectly understandable if instead of a podium in 3 days of depagnne, you just go out and rack up 1000 cq points in 10 days.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

No you said he hadn't done anything good in hilly classics till 2009. Besides you can find a donkey in practically every classics top 10 or Worlds. Fail to see what that proofs.

And while you might think Milan-San Remo 2007 is not an indication towards the hilly classics, I definitely think it is.

Because you're not good enough to win doesn't mean you haven't done well in some high profile races before

the hilly classics are Amstel, Fleche, Liege, San Sebastian and Lombardia

He had no top 10 result in any of those races prior to 2009. So....
Also read the Hitch' post

Not that you'd ever admit you were wrong about something. You never do that. You'll just say you misunderstood and try to make it look like we said something else. You're the champion of misinterpreting everything, especially when there is an argument about Contador, Gilbert or Boonen

 

[El Pistolero]

I find it amazing, that only 2 weeks after Gilberts 4 classics in a row, Pisti is able to frame an argument about how great Gilbert is that he loses.

Here are a few points though.

1 The reason why "its been done before" is not clinic, or not fully clinic. I suppose its clinic in so far as people dope less now than they did then but an explenation that should also be taken into account is that there are more specialists now. 2 generations ago Hinault could win Roubaix and TDF. 1 generation ago Lance, Jallabert, could win classics and then gts. This generation, there are more people who specialise just in climbing, and more in just classics. Its far more difficult to beat gt riders when Igor Anton or Ezequiel Mosquera spend the entire season building up to the Vuelta 3rd week.

2 To those who point to Di Luca and Valverde and Lance as examples well
a Valverde was podiuming gts before he was podiuming top classics. I suppose Contador who has a 3rd in FW is also a hilly classics rider turned gt ace
b Lance had a Vuelta podium and 2 Tour titles at Gilberts current age. Di Luca though was in a similar position to what Gilbert is now.
c All 3 won major hilly one dayers at a way younger age than Gilbert. Dekker is right, Gilbert was good but meh pre 2009. He sure has had a miraculous coming of age these last 2 years. Now if he was named Fabian Cancellara or Sebastian Roessler or Michael Kwiatkowski there would be a lot of sarcastic comments about his new found ability but apparently its perfectly understandable if instead of a podium in 3 days of depagnne, you just go out and rack up 1000 cq points in 10 days.

Lance Armstrong was still good enough to get a podium at the Tour in 2009. I'd say Gilbert has plenty of time if he gets bored with classics

 

[El Pistolero]

the hilly classics are Amstel, Fleche, Liege, San Sebastian and Lombardia

He had no top 10 result in any of those races prior to 2009. So....
Also read the Hitch' post

Not that you'd ever admit you were wrong about something. You never do that. You'll just say you misunderstood and try to make it look like we said something else. You're the champion of misinterpreting everything, especially when there is an argument about Contador, Gilbert or Boonen

You said he didn't do well in hilly classics till 2009.

I'm saying that becoming 8th at the Worlds in 2007 behind all proven Ardennes hard men is doing well in a one day hilly race

+ You discount Milan-San Remo, I definitely do not. If Ricco would have worked together with Gilbert in MSR 2007 one of the 2 would have likely won. Then we wouldn't be having this talk of him magically appearing at the top classics in 2009. Yes, he has greatly improved while moving to a bigger team, no one is dismissing that. But to say he hasn't shown great potential before 2009 in the hilly classics is big bs. Who knows if he wasn't good enough to win Lombardia in 2008. He didn't enter it. He wasn't good enough to win LBL in 2009 as well

I just don't see what's weird about thinking Gilbert could do well in a stage race like the Vuelta if he decided to go for it. Tour, no, that's what the thread starter thinks, not me. I fail to see what his age has to do with anything. Mosquera is how old? Yeah, you can use your dope card, but you guys don't think Gilbert is clean now anyway, so no you can't use it actually then. Armstrong, despite age, is a very good example of why it would be possible. He was 26 before he showed any potential at GTs.

I do agree with Hitch on Valverde. He's not a good example for Gilbert. Valverde is good at a lot of things, he's special. Can't compare his career to anyone. Unlike Cunego he has proven not to be a fluke at GTs.

But Cunego DID win a GT you know

 

[FeyRRR]

Dekker_Tifosi it's no use with arguing with a deluded fanboy like Pistolero.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

It has no use discussing with El Pistolero at all, over any topic, even if it doesn't involve Gilbert.

 

[The Hitch]

The one I liked best was the discussion with Pisti about whether Vacansaleil was a Dutch or Belgian team

 

[Parrulo]

well you guys are being mean. its fun to discuss with pisti . . . . until a certain point ofc. the only problem is that he contradicts himself from time to time and doesn't admit it, but no1 is perfect.

anyway pisti likes machado thinks he is a ubber talent and that he will finish in the top 5 of the giro so i <3 pisti

 

[Franklin]

armstrong- well known story
di luca- already busted twice
valverde- currently suspended

Answer me this:

When was Valverde busted (he was implicated due to a an arrested doctor, not in a direct test)? When was Armstrong busted? Are you indicating Contador, Schleck and others are clean?

You know the likely answers... so is it impossible Gilbert goes the same way?

Or if we turn it around and say they are indeed clean.. I give you Kelly.

I'm not a fanboy. I just know cycling history a bit better than you

 

[Franklin]

Turning into a GT racer now is too late imho.
.

Kelly.
Jalabert

 

[Franklin]

This generation, there are more people who specialise just in climbing, and more in just classics.

Hitch, reality disproves your point. Check the winners of the Ardennes classics. GT specialists are the majority.

LBL:
2005 Alexandre Vinokourov (KAZ) T-Mobile Team
2006 Alejandro Valverde (ESP) Caisse d'Epargne-Illes Balears
2007 Danilo Di Luca (ITA) Liquigas
2008 Alejandro Valverde (ESP) Caisse d'Epargne
2009 Andy Schleck (LUX) Team Saxo Bank
2010 Alexandre Vinokourov (KAZ) Astana
2011 Philippe Gilbert (BEL)

FW:
2005 Danilo Di Luca (ITA) Liquigas-Bianchi
2006 Alejandro Valverde (ESP) Caisse d'Epargne-Illes Balears
2007 Davide Rebellin (ITA) Gerolsteiner
2008 Kim Kirchen (LUX) Team High Road
2009 Davide Rebellin (ITA) Diquigiovanni-Androni
2010 Cadel Evans (AUS) BMC Racing Team
2011 Philippe Gilbert (BEL) Omega Pharma-Lotto

2 To those who point to Di Luca and Valverde and Lance as examples well
a Valverde was podiuming gts before he was podiuming top classics. I suppose Contador who has a 3rd in FW is also a hilly classics rider turned gt ace

I give you Valverde, but how about Di Luca? And no, dope is not an issue. Either way, Gilbert could go a similar way.

It has been done before.

b Lance had a Vuelta podium and 2 Tour titles at Gilberts current age. Di Luca though was in a similar position to what Gilbert is now.

You could argue that Gilbert simply hasn't tried as yet.

c All 3 won major hilly one dayers at a way younger age than Gilbert. Dekker is right, Gilbert was good but meh pre 2009. He sure has had a miraculous coming of age these last 2 years.

Now that's really overstating the reality. There really is a growing line and he certainly wasn't just "meh". Since 2005 he was up there and steadily improving.

Also, check 2008, it was a stellar year.

Now if he was named Fabian Cancellara or Sebastian Roessler or Michael Kwiatkowski there would be a lot of sarcastic comments about his new found ability but apparently its perfectly understandable if instead of a podium in 3 days of depagnne, you just go out and rack up 1000 cq points in 10 days.

If you see his palmares you see the progression. I'm not arguing he's clean or anything, but Gilbert isn't coming out of the left field. Arguing that is going against the reality. Magazines and pundits saw him as a future LBL winner from his neo years.

But back to the argument: I don't say it will happen. But I also think saying that it definitely won't happen is simply going against cycling history.

 

[El Pistolero]

It has no use discussing with El Pistolero at all, over any topic, even if it doesn't involve Gilbert.

Ah, what an argument

Face it you were wrong. Gilbert has done well on the hills in top races way before 2009. You weren't saying Gilbert wasn't good enough to win pre-2009, you said he didn't do well. Then you started discounting everything, even Milan-San Remo.

Ask your self this, what kind of rider does it take to win Milan-San Remo when you're not a sprinter? Yeah, now discount his performance in Milan-San Remo 2007 again. Never mind that it's god damn impressive to finish 6th in your second Milan-San Remo at the age of 22. Never mind that Marc Madiot, outspoken doping critique, isn't surprised at what Gilbert did at OLO at all. Think he knows better than you. But hey Gilbert didn't do well on the hills before 2009 right? I mean all the times he got second in GT stages behind Valverde and Bettini mean nothing?

What I'm saying is, if Di Luca, Kelly, Armstrong and Damiano Cunego can win GTs, so can Gilbert.

Besides there's no one argueing that Gilbert is an as big talent as Armstrong was. So can't see why Gilbert can't turn into a GT rider if he really wanted to just because he didn't peak as a 20 year old. Bs argument with zero reasoning behind it. Seeing as Armstrong won his first Tour when he was 27 and went on to win 7 more I'm thinking Gilbert has enough time left if he ever decides to do well in a GT like the Vuelta for example.

No he won't win the Tour and that's because Alberto Contador is the same age of him and a ten times bigger talent than Gilbert. Also because Andy Schleck is actually 2-3 years younger than him and also a way bigger talent. But let's be honest, these guys don't do the Vuelta every year. Well, Andy does, but he doesn't give a sh*t for it.

I'm sure Mosquera agrees with you that Gilbert is too old to do well in the Vuelta GC

 

[18-Valve. (pithy)]

Never mind that Marc Madiot, outspoken doping critique, isn't surprised at what Gilbert did at OLO at all. Think he knows better than you.

Appeal to false authority. Madiot is not an anti-doping expert.

De Mondenard is.