Sastre to skip Tour?

[pmcg76]

I go away for a few days and return to the forum to find it almost impossible to find a non Contador/Lance thread. This seemed fairly relevant news but got ignored just like Sastre did at the Tour.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/sastre-leans-towards-giro-ditalia-vuelta-a-espana


It seems that Sastre is considering skipping the Tour next year which would be disappointing. I know he had a poor race this year but surely next years race would be better suited to his talents.

What do people think is the reason for this?

 

[issoisso]

I go away for a few days and return to the forum to find it almost impossible to find a non Contador/Lance thread. This seemed fairly relevant news but got ignored just like Sastre did at the Tour.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/sastre-leans-towards-giro-ditalia-vuelta-a-espana


It seems that Sastre is considering skipping the Tour next year which would be disappointing. I know he had a poor race this year but surely next years race would be better suited to his talents.

What do people think is the reason for this?

Actually it hasn't been ignored It's been briefly discussed in the "general news thread"

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=4180&page=5

 

[pmcg76]

That was a brief discussion. I was away for a few days so just catching up with the news and have not been through all the threads. Didnt see any threads with Sastre in the title.

 

[Moondance]

I think it's a good move for him, focusing on the big races he has a serious shot to win. I would certainly rank him along with, perhaps even ahead of, Pellizotti as the favorite for the Giro based on the route. Don't know what the Vuelta is going to be like, but this year's route would've been good for him.

 

[issoisso]

I think it's a good move for him, focusing on the big races he has a serious shot to win. I would certainly rank him along with, perhaps even ahead of, Pellizotti as the favorite for the Giro based on the route. Don't know what the Vuelta is going to be like, but this year's route would've been good for him.

I agree with him skipping the Tour if he ends up doing it. The Giro suits him and the Tour is too close together for him to peak again at it.

 

[Mellow Velo]

He's awaiting the Vuelta route, so it sounds like a Giro/Tour or Giro/Vuelta permutation.
Will Cervelo accept this and go all out with Thor?
Would be a smart move.

Isn't Dennis the Menace planning a similar move?

Cadel should consider it.....but won't.
Surprising, when he has such an affinity with Italy.

Besides, all these guys will get trampled on, in the media stampede, over that other pair.

 

[Cogombre]

If I were Sastre, I'd go to a Giro/Vuelta. The Giro is tailor made for him, and the Vuelta won't have more TT than the Tour, so the route will probably suit him. And with the best riders in the Tour riding with more powerful teams he hasn't too many options of doing more than a Top 10, imo, while he is perfectly capable of wining the Giro, and maybe also the Vuelta (we'll see).

 

[Kazistuta]

Sastre already denied that he has said that....

http://translate.google.dk/translat...dk/index.php?id_parent=1&id=28&id_nyhed=22687

Actually it seems likely that a reporter made up the story to spice things up...after all it's "cucumber season"

 

[Anonymous]

He's awaiting the Vuelta route, so it sounds like a Giro/Tour or Giro/Vuelta permutation.
Will Cervelo accept this and go all out with Thor?
Would be a smart move.

Isn't Dennis the Menace planning a similar move?

Cadel should consider it.....but won't.
Surprising, when he has such an affinity with Italy.

Besides, all these guys will get trampled on, in the media stampede, over that other pair.

I think Cervelo will accept him skipping the tour becoz they know next year Cav wants the green, so dedicating a good leadout train for Thor is essential.

I think it's a smart move, I think most people in the cycling world realise that the 2008 TDF was the best chance for the 'not-best' rider to win a tour before they retire (i.e. Sastre, Menchov, VDV, Evans, FSchleck). With the return of Astana, plus an improving AS it's time for these guys to focus on other things (although as a biased Aussie, I do think Cadel can win the tour, if they include the TTkms of 07 and 08 again)

There is an outside chance that Sastre can join the elite club of winning all 3 GTs. I think he can win the Giro, but up against Valverde in the Vuelta, i'm not sure he'd have it in him (I assume Valv will be cleared btw)

Surprising that Cadel will skip the Giro this year as I would like him to at least try it, but I really believe he missed his chance in 2009. The Giro route was tailor made for him, with good climbing and lots of TT kms, but hindsight is a great thing...

Cadel was on an Oz sports TV show last night and the Today show in the morning and said the Tour is his main objective and he firmly believes that he has 3-4 tours left in him and that he thinks he can win. Despite what I've said about Cadel focusing on the Giro/Vuelta instead, I quite admire his confidence. He is among only a few people who actually put their hand up and say I can win the tour. To the best of my knowledge, the only other riders that have the balls to say that they can WIN are AC, AS and LA.. So about guys like Sastre and Menchov, I think Giro/Vuelta is their best bet, but for Cadel I have to say i'm undecided - I want him to focus on the tour, but I also want him to win a GT, so perhaps the Tour/Vuelta is the best strategy for him...

 

[luckyboy]

To the best of my knowledge, the only other riders that have the balls to say that they can WIN are AC, AS and LA.. So about guys like Sastre and Menchov, I think Giro/Vuelta is their best bet, but for Cadel I have to say i'm undecided - I want him to focus on the tour, but I also want him to win a GT, so perhaps the Tour/Vuelta is the best strategy for him...

I would say that everyone apart from Contador would have a better time if they focused on the Giro or Vuelta. Maybe Schleck will be a bit closer to AC in this year's Tour, but I have no idea where he would take time out of him in oder to win it.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Look at it this way though: While the media hype will entirely be between AC and LA, it's quite likely the race won't be. AC will be a very heavy favorite, and LA probably near 10th. This means if anything happens to AC, at all, the race will be completely up for grabs, and Sastre or Evans would have an excellent chance of ascending to the top. Not that you can rely on AC faltering, but it's something to consider.

Sastre said the Giro/Tour double attempt last year wore him out, so I'd think he'll try to completely focus on one GT next year. If he chooses the Giro or Vuelta, I can see Cervelo sending their entire team behind Thor to the Tour, which could make him very difficult to beat for the Maillot Vert.

 

[lagartija]

i would just like to add , i am a sastre fan , and i would love to see him on the top step at the giro , and i do think if he chose to go that route cervelo would send the A team to italy......but i do agree they will be all in at the tour for the green.....its doable imo

 

[progressor]

While the media hype will entirely be between AC and LA, it's quite likely the race won't be. AC will be a very heavy favorite, and LA probably near 10th. .

First part makes sense, second part is unrealistic. Sure you hate him, but when assessing odds it pay's to be more neutral

http://www.oddschecker.com/other-sports/cycling/

http://sports.williamhill.com/bet/EN/betting/e/439313/Tour-de-France-2010.html

http://www.eurobet.com/sb.go?page=supergrouppage&sportid=8&supergroup=++Tour+de+France+2010&groupid=718287&lang=1&sid=1&ms=MS

 

[skidmark]

First part makes sense, second part is unrealistic. Sure you hate him, but when assessing odds it pay's to be more neutral

http://www.oddschecker.com/other-sports/cycling/

http://sports.williamhill.com/bet/EN/betting/e/439313/Tour-de-France-2010.html

http://www.eurobet.com/sb.go?page=supergrouppage&sportid=8&supergroup=++Tour+de+France+2010&groupid=718287&lang=1&sid=1&ms=MS

Point observed. However, before this year's Tour Contador and Armstrong were neck-in-neck with regards to 'favorite' status on the betting sites, despite the fact that Armstrong had done little this season to garner that much of a movement behind his winning. I drew the conclusion that it was his incredible fame beyond cycling that bolstered those numbers, and the fact that betting odds are based on an incredible amount of (mostly casual) fans, most of whom know little more than Lance won 7 tours. So I wouldn't consider betting odds to be entirely 'neutral', is all I'm saying.

 

[Anonymous]

First part makes sense, second part is unrealistic. Sure you hate him, but when assessing odds it pay's to be more neutral

http://www.oddschecker.com/other-sports/cycling/

http://sports.williamhill.com/bet/EN/betting/e/439313/Tour-de-France-2010.html

http://www.eurobet.com/sb.go?page=supergrouppage&sportid=8&supergroup=++Tour+de+France+2010&groupid=718287&lang=1&sid=1&ms=MS

this really goes against everything i beleive but 28-1 on cadel is almost too good to pass up... all it takes is one doping scandal in the right place and he could be in with a shot..

 

[progressor]

Point observed. However, before this year's Tour Contador and Armstrong were neck-in-neck with regards to 'favorite' status on the betting sites, despite the fact that Armstrong had done little this season to garner that much of a movement behind his winning. I drew the conclusion that it was his incredible fame beyond cycling that bolstered those numbers, and the fact that betting odds are based on an incredible amount of (mostly casual) fans, most of whom know little more than Lance won 7 tours. So I wouldn't consider betting odds to be entirely 'neutral', is all I'm saying.

Not quite
http://www.active.com/cycling/tourdefrance/articles/Favorites-and-Long-Shots-Odds-for-the-2009-Tour-Contenders.htm

But definitely shorter.

 

[progressor]

this really goes against everything i beleive but 28-1 on cadel is almost too good to pass up... all it takes is one doping scandal in the right place and he could be in with a shot..

If only you were in a position to arrange that scandal

 

[luckyboy]

First part makes sense, second part is unrealistic. Sure you hate him, but when assessing odds it pay's to be more neutral

http://www.oddschecker.com/other-sports/cycling/

http://sports.williamhill.com/bet/EN/betting/e/439313/Tour-de-France-2010.html

http://www.eurobet.com/sb.go?page=supergrouppage&sportid=8&supergroup=++Tour+de+France+2010&groupid=718287&lang=1&sid=1&ms=MS

Oh come one, we've seen with our own eyes how he struggled at the Tour, with the team dragging him up to the podium. Kloden, who was stronger, sacrificed himself. How the hell is Valverde at the same odds as Wiggins?! And Sastre and Evans at those prices?! Clearly, some bookies just looked at last year's Tour and worked out the odds from the GC

One of those sites has Cavendish at the same odds as Maaskant, and better odds to win Paris-Roubaix as Flecha, Hincapie, Hoste, Van Summeren, Nuyens, Breschel, O'Grady, and many more who are much more accomplished at cobbled racing than he is

 

[BroDeal]

First part makes sense, second part is unrealistic. Sure you hate him, but when assessing odds it pay's to be more neutral

http://www.oddschecker.com/other-sports/cycling/

http://sports.williamhill.com/bet/EN/betting/e/439313/Tour-de-France-2010.html

http://www.eurobet.com/sb.go?page=supergrouppage&sportid=8&supergroup=++Tour+de+France+2010&groupid=718287&lang=1&sid=1&ms=MS

Jeebus! Get a clue. Odds are based upon the bets that have been made so the house can turn a profit no matter what the result is. The easiest way to make money betting is to find a competition that has caught the general public's interest and the casual betting public has created grossly distorted odds.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

First part makes sense, second part is unrealistic. Sure you hate him, but when assessing odds it pay's to be more neutral.

Could you please explain to me why my prediction, which I based on what I saw at the Tour this year, as succinctly explained by both Lucky and BroDeal posted, makes it to where I hate Lance? "Sure, you hate him" were your words, as quoted above.

Show your reasoning, and please be specific.

 

[progressor]

Oh come one, we've seen with our own eyes how he struggled at the Tour, with the team dragging him up to the podium. Kloden, who was stronger, sacrificed himself. How the hell is Valverde at the same odds as Wiggins?! And Sastre and Evans at those prices?! Clearly, some bookies just looked at last year's Tour and worked out the odds from the GC

One of those sites has Cavendish at the same odds as Maaskant, and better odds to win Paris-Roubaix as Flecha, Hincapie, Hoste, Van Summeren, Nuyens, Breschel, O'Grady, and many more who are much more accomplished at cobbled racing than he is

I saw him struggle up verbier with kloden helping. Only day I saw that.

As for odd, definitely not a precise science, and odds are influenced more to it than just what is perceived as most likely, but it's a clear statement that 10th favourite for LA is just LA hate talk, not neutral perspective.

 

[progressor]

Could you please explain to me why my prediction, which I based on what I saw at the Tour this year, as succinctly explained by both Lucky and BroDeal posted, makes it to where I hate Lance? "Sure, you hate him" were your words, as quoted above.

Show your reasoning, and please be specific.

Fair enough. Theres nothing in your post that says you hate him. I don't know if you've ever explicitly stated that. So I'll retract that. I still think your perspective lack neutrality as you suggest he'll be around 10th favourite. I made that point with the betting links, which have him as a distinct 3rd favourite.

Edit: and retract the similar hate comment in the post above for the same reason

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I really don't think oddsmakers are the best guideline for expert predictions, as they cater to the betting public at large. Here is my reasoning for thinking Lance will do poorer in 2010 than in 2009 in the Tour:

1. Remove the TTT from the 2009 Tour, as there isn't one in 2010, and his placing would have been lower, as he picked up over two minutes alone there on Rabobank and Silence-Lotto, among other teams. This alone would have probably dropped him to 7th in 2009.

2. His teammates held back on several occasions for his benefit. Contador, Kloden, perhaps even Leipheimer at one point. In 2010 this won't be the case with AC, and maybe not Kloden.

3. The lack of attacking by Contador precipitated a lack of counter attacking by his chief rivals, this keeping the gaps even lower in the top riders.

4. Never once did Lance pose a serious threat, or launch a serious attack to the other GC contenders in the Tour, or come close to winning a stage, or anything.

5. 2010 by most accounts is even more geared towards pure climbers.

6. He will be still one more year past his prime, while several of the riders who have been challenging in recent years, Contador, Kreuziger, Gesink, Nibali, the Schlecks, move a year closer to their peak years.

This, and just how much he befitted, or held back, has been debated here ad nauseum, but if you'd like to give it another shot, have at it.

 

[progressor]

I really don't think oddsmakers are the best guideline for expert predictions, as they cater to the betting public at large. Here is my reasoning for thinking Lance will do poorer in 2010 than in 2009 in the Tour:

1. Remove the TTT from the 2009 Tour, as there isn't one in 2010, and his placing would have been lower, as he picked up over two minutes alone there on Rabobank and Silence-Lotto, among other teams. This alone would have probably dropped him to 7th in 2009.

2. His teammates held back on several occasions for his benefit. Contador, Kloden, perhaps even Leipheimer at one point. In 2010 this won't be the case with AC, and maybe not Kloden.

3. The lack of attacking by Contador precipitated a lack of counter attacking by his chief rivals, this keeping the gaps even lower in the top riders.

4. Never once did Lance pose a serious threat, or launch a serious attack to the other GC contenders in the Tour, or come close to winning a stage, or anything.

5. 2010 by most accounts is even more geared towards pure climbers.

6. He will be still one more year past his prime, while several of the riders who have been challenging in recent years, Contador, Kreuziger, Gesink, Nibali, the Schlecks, move a year closer to their peak years.

This, and just how much he befitted, or held back, has been debated here ad nauseum, but if you'd like to give it another shot, have at it.

I think it's all a large unknown Because

a) we don't know whether he was at peak fitness this year. Despite the extreme sceptism, it's very possible he will come back in better form

b) Although not at prime age we do not know what effect age has on him, he's not as old as some like to think, physical aging is variable, not locked to chronological age.

c) we don't know how much age affected previous champions drop off and how much was overuse/wear and tear. The 3 year break is unique. His 3rd place this year suggests he's got something left - we simply can't know how much to next year.

d) The teammate to contador thing muddies the water further. I don't think he was riding for himself alone. Despite all the issues I think both he and contador largely road for the team after their personal battle was decided and we didn't see either of them really give it their all in the later climbs.

I think theres to many unknowns to predict. His comeback was pretty good. Next year I think we'll know completely how good

of course contador may be the best opponent he's faced even if he gets back to his absolute peak.

 

[Mellow Velo]

First part makes sense, second part is unrealistic.

I think it's all a large unknown
I think theres too many unknowns to predict. His comeback was pretty good. Next year I think we'll know completely how good

In other words, Alpe's statement contradicts your desires, nothing more.

Rather than run an interesting thread off the rails and back into yet more Lance head bashing, try and accept that other posters will hold a different perspective on his potential to improve, against a host of young guns.
No one has a crystal ball.


Back on topic.
I think Cadel is having a "Tom Danielson moment", when he talks of the Tour.
Not only would Contador have to avoid disaster, but Schleck, too.

To me, Cadel is 2-5% off what it takes to be a Tour winner, in both climbing and trialing.
Hence, the Giro should be his goal.
(Having said that, I never got Sastre into my post!)