Schleck should give up yellow.

[The Ripper]

All Andy needs to do is to ride smarter tactically, don't wait till week three to decide that it is then time to try to take time out of his opponents and just maybe try to win a couple of week long stage races to help him learn how to manage a race from beginning to end.

That is pretty much it. Ride smarter (training and racing). Don't wait till the last few days to make a move. And race shorter stage races to learn, simulate, and practice.

He needs to turn into a real bike racer FFS!

 

[Mr. O'Clock]

Andy will win the tour numerous times no doubt. Anyone who doubts his tougness has never been in competition. His pedaling syle is beautiful.

 

[auscyclefan94]

First of all apologies if I am repeating anything here. Have not been on the forum for a while due to new job, moving etc.
It is really apparent now that Andy Schleck is not a tour winner. He is a fantastic climber and what he did on the Galibier was amazing. He seems to believe that being this climber can win him the tour, but I do not believe he will ever be a complete cyclist. Evans and Contadour are also great climbers, but they are also fantastic descenders and time trialists. This is why Evans and Contadour are tour winners and Schleck won't be. Maybe he should start looking to polka dot instead.
Anyway apologies if this has been repeated by someone with 180,000+ posts, before you send me a link to your thread.

Did Joop Zoetemelk give up after 9 tours and many top 10 places? No. He won the tour.

 

[spanky wanderlust]

did i watch a different race than some other people on here? didn't andy get a close 2nd place two years in a row?

and isn't he still really young? hmmm...

he will win it eventually. especially if the tt kms keep getting scaled back. and if contador decides not to show up for some reason or gets injured.

maybe in a few years they will axe the time trial as a tour discipline altogether. then andy will have a shot.

they might also have to get rid of descending.

 

[spanky wanderlust]

oh. and he needs to listen to a competent ds. andy thinks he can make his own decisions out on the road. that is just silly.

let's tally this up: he can't tt. he can't go downhill. he can't shift gears properly. he can't read a race and make good decisions.

what he can do is climb tall, steep mountains very fast.

other than that he really is not a very good bicycle rider. it is amazing he survives out there at all really.

he may yet win a tour. but i'm not sure i like what that would say about the sport.

 

[Angliru]

That is pretty much it. Ride smarter (training and racing). Don't wait till the last few days to make a move. And race shorter stage races to learn, simulate, and practice.

He needs to turn into a real bike racer FFS!

It's a well known fact that he doesn't like to train, preferring to race to get his "training" in. This tells me that in between these races he allows his fitness to dissipate and only by racing can he build it back up. This explains his terrible/subpar performances in events that should really suit, those being virtually every weeklong stage race that he enters.

His KoM "win" in TdS was being trumpeted as a major accomplishment, which is an insult to the intelligence of those that really follow the sport. The supposed 2nd best stage racer in the world (should we change that to the 3rd best grand tour racer if that?) can only pull out a meager KoM jersey win in the TdS and we the fans of the sport are supposed to be impressed?

 

[Angliru]

did i watch a different race than some other people on here? didn't andy get a close 2nd place two years in a row?

and isn't he still really young? hmmm...

he will win it eventually. especially if the tt kms keep getting scaled back. and if contador decides not to show up for some reason or gets injured.

maybe in a few years they will axe the time trial as a tour discipline altogether. then andy will have a shot.

they might also have to get rid of descending.

Whole lotta "if's" there Spanky!

 

[El Pistolero]

Andy will win the tour numerous times no doubt. Anyone who doubts his tougness has never been in competition. His pedaling syle is beautiful.

You heard it here first, Filippo Pozzato will win the Tour one day!

 

[Franklin]

Once again - bwa ha ha ha. Yes, it does matter. Pick some other climbers that pulled out that kind of TT. Not a "hanging in there and killing them in the climbs" performance.

BWAHAHAHA for not reading the examples I mentioned. But I'll just mention my example again: van Impe, as he was easily as much a climber as Andy. And every other TdF winner for that matter.

What about : There has never been a bad TTing TdF winner is hard for you to grasp.

Not a single one. Clean, charged, that rule is written in granite.

While Andy gave up the jersey after the TT (or perhaps during is a better statement ), he lost the race by not taking major time in what was "supposed to be" his domain, at least according to most pundits. When you think about it, while I applaud the actions of his breakaway, in reality it was a bit of a desperate move because he had not managed to do anything in the mountains up to that point.

And what makes Andy so special that he as the first and only rider ever can just win it in the mountains and more or less ignore the TT? No explanations have been found other than: he became second three times in a row.

Once again: there have been better climbers than Andy in the past who did not win a TdF. What makes Andy special to be able to ignore the golden TT rule?

How do you explain every TdF winner did good in TT's?

The supposed 2nd best stage racer in the world (should we change that to the 3rd best grand tour racer if that?) can only pull out a meager KoM jersey win in the TdS and we the fans of the sport are supposed to be impressed?

At least Menchov, Basso and Cadel rank above him, if not in skills, then in effectiveness. And well, Nibali won more than AS as well....

It's not just that AS never won a GT... AS never won a stage race...

Did Joop Zoetemelk give up after 9 tours and many top 10 places? No. He won the tour.

How about Hennie Kuiper? Or Raymond Poulidor? Or a climber like Steven Rooks?

 

[El Pistolero]

Some people seem to make the mistake of looking at the time trials of the person who won the Tour in that Tour and then decide they can do a good time trial. Guys like Rasmussen, Sastre and Voeckler for example. Sorry, but I think of the clinic then. These guys suck at time trials yet can do a damn good time trial out of nowhere.

I don't believe in the arguments like Voeckler never had to give it all in a time trial. He did gave it all in the time trial of 2004. Sure, he was way younger back then and it's not hard to believe he has improved a lot since then, but that time trial was extremely crappy... Extremely crappy crappy crappy crappy. I don't believe for once a normal Voeckler can ride a good time trial in the Tour. Certainly not after wasting that much energy in doing stupid things. If Contador wasn't in this Tour we'd have Voecker as the winner now Or at the least second... Ok, most likely second as Cuddles would have destroyed him in the time trial.

 

[Jeanne]

I don't think it makes sense to make all these comparisons with other tours and other tour winners. every tour is different; different route, different contenders in different shape -> different situation every time. It's also a matter of circumstances and luck every time.

 

[Cobblestones]

Did Joop Zoetemelk give up after 9 tours and many top 10 places? No. He won the tour.

On the other hand, in 1997, Ullrich looked so dominant, no one would have guessed that he'd never win a TdF again.

 

[The Ripper]

What about : There has never been a bad TTing TdF winner is hard for you to grasp ... And what makes Andy so special that he as the first and only rider ever can just win it in the mountains and more or less ignore the TT? No explanations have been found other than: he became second three times in a row.

Now now. I've never said that Shrek should ignore his TT or that a terrible TT was OK. I just don't think the examples initially used were the best. If you don`t like that, then HTFU

FWIW, if he had raced the Dauphiné TT, he would have likely gone at least 30 seconds faster. Not enough, but again pointing to some pretty straight forward training.

Angliru nailed it when noting Shrek does not like to train. Nor race all that much. I know his attacks are generally amusing (jump, slow to look, jump, slow to look )

 

[Mambo95]

And what makes Andy so special that he as the first and only rider ever can just win it in the mountains and more or less ignore the TT? No explanations have been found other than: he became second three times in a row.

Once again: there have been better climbers than Andy in the past who did not win a TdF. What makes Andy special to be able to ignore the golden TT rule?

How do you explain every TdF winner did good in TT's?

What is classed as 'good' though? Earlier you ruled out Pantani as an exception to the rule saying his final TT was 'fantastic'. Now, Pantani came 3rd in the TT, but let's compare times.

In last TT 1998: Pantani lost to Ullrich by 2'35
In last TT 2011: Schleck lost to Evans by 2'31

How is one fantastic and the other terrible? The loses are virtually identical.

Admittedly, Pantani's TT was 9km longer, but he had also lost 4'20 in a TT earlier in the Tour (and 43s in the Prologue).

 

[Duartista]

How do you explain every TdF winner did good in TT's?

Admittedly, Pantani's TT was 9km longer, but he had also lost 4'20 in a TT earlier in the Tour (and 43s in the Prologue).

This is the key point I think, for two reasons. One, Pantani won that Tour in the mountains. He had plenty in hand for the last TT. Two, comparing a Tour with 42 km of individual time trialing with the majority of past Tours, where there was usually around 100km (or more) of tt'ing doesn't make sense.

If Prudhomme sticks to his policy of only having one TT, it is very possible for Schleck to win a Tour, so long as Contador is not there.

 

[thehog]

What is classed as 'good' though? Earlier you ruled out Pantani as an exception to the rule saying his final TT was 'fantastic'. Now, Pantani came 3rd in the TT, but let's compare times.

In last TT 1998: Pantani lost to Ullrich by 2'35
In last TT 2011: Schleck lost to Evans by 2'31

How is one fantastic and the other terrible? The loses are virtually identical.

Admittedly, Pantani's TT was 9km longer, but he had also lost 4'20 in a TT earlier in the Tour (and 43s in the Prologue).

Although your point about time lost in TT is relevant the 1998 Tour has to be considered an anomaly. Less than 100 finished. One stage had to be annulled.

Pantani did his own Shleck and went on a crazed attack on the Galiber. Ullrich really lost that Tour by not covering up on the decent. He lost significant time there - I mean when was the last time finsihed 2nd in the Tour by losing 9 minutes on one mountain stage? In addition half the field was arrested or spent various nights in jail cells. Look at the top 10 that year. I don’t think Pantani would have won if Ullrich had put a rain jacket on that day. He certainly wouldn’t have won if Festina was still allowed to race.

 

[Mambo95]

Although your point about time lost in TT is relevant the 1998 Tour has to be considered an anomaly. Less than 100 finished. One stage had to be annulled.

Pantani did his own Shleck and went on a crazed attack on the Galiber. Ullrich really lost that Tour by not covering up on the decent. He lost significant time there. In addition half the field was arrested or spent various nights in jail cells. I mean look at the top 10 that year. I don’t think Pantani would have won if Ullrich had put a rain jacket on that day. He certainly wouldn’t have won if Festina was still allowed to race.

Oh, I know all that.

My point was more about what was being perceived as 'good' or 'bad' by that particular poster and that the 'fantastic' TT of Pantani was actually not really any different to Schleck's.

 

[thehog]

Oh, I know all that.

My point was more about what was being perceived as 'good' or 'bad' by that particular poster and that the 'fantastic' TT of Pantani was actually not really any different to Schleck's.

Got it.

It helped that Pantani got 9 minutes in one stage. Can't imagine Shleck ever getting that sort of time.

 

[Duartista]

Got it.

It helped that Pantani got 9 minutes in one stage. Can't imagine Shleck ever getting that sort of time.

He wouldn't need that sort of time. Say he was competing against Evans and Menchov, he would need to gain at least 3 minutes over 4-5 mountain stages to take into the final TT. If he were able to do that, he would have a chance.

 

[thehog]

He wouldn't need that sort of time. Say he was competing against Evans and Menchov, he would need to gain at least 3 minutes over 4-5 mountain stages to take into the final TT. If he were able to do that, he would have a chance.

If there's more than one ITT he would. 6 minutes at least. I also bet you that Fab will gone in a year when he doesn't get his classics team (he's got one eye on Thor and how he's being looked after at BMC). Without Canc in the team there's another lost 5 minutes in the TTT and keeping the Shleck's out of trouble in week one.

I'm finding it hard to see how either of the Shlecks can win a Tour in their careers. They're fairly good climbers but both are as thick as two bricks and have not a lot else to offer. Maybe if it was still 1998 they could "prepare" the old way which might have helped them in the ITT.

 

[Mshengu]

Next year Andy Schleck will not be allowed to go, so is Thomas Voeckler. This year he could do what he did because there was no true leader of the Tour. Contador was not in top condition and also didn't have a team to control the situation.

Next year he will have to attack many many times to gain even 2 seconds....
Its gonna be tough for Andy, that's why improving his TT right now is critical. I really don't see him winning it anytime soon. He might actually fade like Basso, Carlos Sastre, Iban Mayo and other "great" climbers. Well at least Sastre has a Tour victory under his belt.

 

[Duartista]

If there's more than one ITT he would. 6 minutes at least. I also bet you that Fab will gone in a year when he doesn't get his classics team (he's got one eye on Thor and how he's being looked after at BMC). Without Canc in the team there's another lost 5 minutes in the TTT and keeping the Shleck's out of trouble in week one.

I'm finding it hard to see how either of the Shlecks can win a Tour in their careers. They're fairly good climbers but both are as thick as two bricks and have not a lot else to offer. Maybe if it was still 1998 they could "prepare" the old way which might have helped them in the ITT.

I was working on the assumption that they will continue with the one ITT format. If they go back to two, then you are right, he has next to no chance.

In Frank's case, I don't think he will ever win a GT whatever the course.

 

[Jeanne]

I was working on the assumption that they will continue with the one ITT format. If they go back to two, then you are right, he has next to no chance.

In Frank's case, I don't think he will ever win a GT whatever the course.

agree with that.

But no one ever thought of Frank as a potential TDF winner anyway!? Did I miss something?

 

[Duartista]

agree with that.

But no one ever thought of Frank as a potential TDF winner anyway!? Did I miss something?

Just replying to the hog's post:

I'm finding it hard to see how either of the Shlecks can win a Tour in their careers. They're fairly good climbers but both are as thick as two bricks and have not a lot else to offer

I was agreeing with him about Frank, but less so Andy.

 

[ManInFull]

Next year Andy Schleck will not be allowed to go, so is Thomas Voeckler. This year he could do what he did because there was no true leader of the Tour. Contador was not in top condition and also didn't have a team to control the situation.

Yes, if AC had felt that he could respond to Andy's attack, I suspect that AC would have gone with Andy. Of course, Cadel and the others would not have allowed AC and Schleck to go like that--there would have been a response. Based on how Andy had done in earlier stages, he likely would have cut the attack short and went back to the peleton. Then, we likely would have seen Cadel stick to Andy's wheel up Galibier.