So what happens if Contador wins by 39 seconds or less?

[Menndo]

The thing is that Contador and Schleck made the same time in the climbs and Contador took 1:13 over Andy in the TTs.

 

[nowhereman]

You might want to check you math before you tell other to check their math. Contador won the TT by 31 seconds, the same as Andy's lead before the chain incident. Contador wins the GC by 39 seconds the same as Andy lost in the Chain incident.

His lead was30 seconds not 31. Check the standings. He still would have taken the TdF by 1 second, in the haters fantasy world.

 

[roundabout]

His lead was30 seconds not 31. Check the standings. He still would have taken the TdF by 1 second, in the haters fantasy world.

Standings checked.

http://www.letour.fr/2010/TDF/LIVE/us/1400/classement/index.html

You're wrong.

 

[nowhereman]

In the end the what ifs are meaningless because they are all numbers pulled out of peoples butts. In different circumstances the riders all would have behaved differently and no one knows what the results would have been.

The fact is that given different circumstances for his last 5 grand tours Contador adapted his tactics and performance in a way that got him a victory every time. End of story. What if Armstrong had not come out of retirement last tour? What if Astana had not got uninvited from one years Tour? What if FC had not got a stage neutralized or Andy had not dropped his chain?

You can only reliably know the results of what actually happened not what they would have been if something had been different.

Bravo!! You sound way too well-balanced, and thoughtful for this forum! Welcome to the Asylum

 

[nowhereman]

Standings checked.

http://www.letour.fr/2010/TDF/LIVE/us/1400/classement/index.html

You're wrong.

You're right don't know how I Fugged that one up, but I did. My apologies. But it still changes absolutely nothing. This is, in all actuality, a very silly argument. And as henryg said above. It's not a matter of what if's.
Andy has TdF titles in his future, you can bet on that. And, as he, himself said. If he doesn't pull it out, it wasn't meant to happen.
________________________________________________________________
Better to ask for forgiveness, than to ask for permission.

 

[perico]

i don't really care who won, this sport lost its hold on me for good in 2006.

but for anyone who has followed the sport for longer than the past 11 years--and i followed it and loved it from 1981 until 2006 (though the love affair part started to wane admittedly in 1999), you cannot seriously say that there has not been unwritten rules of good sportsmanship:

1. against attacking the yellow jersey for mechanicals and accidents

2. that whoever is in the yellow jersey, as well as any elder statesman of the tour, can call for the neutralization of a stage (whether in protest for kicking festina out in 1999 or because a stage is viewed as unnecessarily dangerous as in this tour in stage 2).

anyone who says otherwise either does not know the tour's history and traditions, or is lying.

regarding stage 2: fabian was in yellow and is one of the elder statesmen of the sport--which was exactly why the peloton did what he asked them to do. it is completely illogical to claim that a stage, which benefited no one, cost anyone the tour. if everyone comes in at the same time, then no one has benefited and so no one has been harmed--ergo the word "neutralized."

the time gaps between the podium contenders at that point were so small, that to say menchov's tour was stolen do to good sportsmanship by his fellow cyclists is moronic, stupid, and nonsensical. no one held menchov back in stage 2, he chose to turn it off, as did thor, and the rest of the peloton. it was their choice; had any chose to attack or refuse to comply, there was nothing fabian or anyone else could do to stop them. that is the difference between a rule and good sportsmanship, and why following the latter means so much than following the former. (funny how so many seem to forget that fabian sacrificed his yellow that day as well).

regarding stage 3: the only reason to throw a cobbles stage into the tour is to throw in chaos and confusion into the tour. everyone knew going into stage 3 that mechanicals and accidents were going to be the rule not the exception; which is why some riders, including both schelcks, felt that it was wrong to include it, becase the tour isn't supposed to be about technology, it is supposed to be about endurance and strength and heart.

compare stage 3 to a normal stage in the tour, whether flat or mountainous--unlike any other stage, every team had mechanics placed all over the course with wheels and parts because they knew they would likely be needed. unlike any other stage, the riders could only receive help from thier own team cars, and not the neutral service car--because coping with chaos is why the stage was included. lastly, fabian and andy did not attack, they rode at a constant tempo at the front from the get go.

to say that andy benefitted from his brother's serious crash is crass and base. to say that andy owed alberto for any time alberto may have lost due to andy's brother's compound collar bone fracture is tacky in the supreme. alberto went in to that stage with a pretty decent time gap from the prologue, and came out with what should have been an insignificant time loss for "the best climber in the world, who everyone knew would easily take out at least a minute and half in the last time trial anyway."

the dropped chain: it was unsporting for albertos to captialize on it. not because it was andy, but because it was bad sportsmanship, plain and simple, and because it defied and sullied the longtime traditions of the tour.

andy was in yellow, and the yellow jersey is what was insulted by alberto's behavior. comparisons to F1 are stupid and spurious. auto racing of all types, arose as a test of technology and engineering--which is why driver error is not an issue. the tour arose as a test to see who was the strongest man--and in fact, technological and engineering advantages have been held at bay by the organizers since the tour's inception. the tour is not supposed to be a test of whose got the best bike, but whose got the biggest heart and the strongest legs. most seem to be confusing not-cheating with sportsmanship. they are not the synonyms.

the only thing left for this sport, since the performances--none of them--can be viewed without skepticism--is its silly, quaint, charming traditions, like not capitalizing on misfortune and the esprit de corps of the peloton as whole. without those tradtions, there is nothing left, but a filthy sport full of fakes and frauds and a$$holes, lacking even the barest modicum of sportsmanship and decency.

without the dropped chain, andy would have finished first. but even with it, he still is the winner of this tour. alberto did not cheat, but nor did he win. he simply ends in first place. that is not the same thing as being a champion; it is not the same thing as winning (in the true sense of the word--a word used to honor results like John Akhwari coming in dead last in the marathon of the 1968 Summer Olympics). only champions win. but not all champions finish first.

at every turn people said that andy would loose huge time: on the cobbles, in the time trial, in the mountains. and at every stage he proved the naysayers wrong. i am far too cynical to view his achievement without questioning its legitimacy, but i nonetheless, recognize that it is an achievement far greater than anything alberto achieved in this tour.

the fact that so many devotees of this sport openly disparage good sportsmanship, only confirms that this sport is a shameful waste of time.

Were you crying about it when Roche and Mottet attacked and cost Bernard his victory in 1987?

 

[henryg]

But Alberto tried to drop AS on that stage and couldn't. He tried to win that stage.

Andy in his post race interview practically thanked Alberto for not sprinting, acknowledging he (AC) did the gentlemanly thing after Andy was out front the whole climb. Had he sprinted he might have picked up a few seconds and most surely the stage win. That's why it was all hugs, back slaps and winks at the end of the stage.

 

[Señor_Contador]

Totally agree here. Bike racing is almost entirely based on unwritten rules: ride as a group, exchange pulls, yellow jersey team must drive the peloton to catch breaks, don't attack your own teammate after he attacks, let the break survive if they aren't a threat to the GC, etc.

You're forgetting rule # 2 (rule # 1 is showing up for the event): "Know thy bicycle". And most important, rule # 3: "Know when and how to attack". Rule # 345 in the Tourmalet chapter: "If you see sheep on the road up to the Tourmalet, don't race them, because they don't know anything about cycling".

 

[hrotha]

You're forgetting rule # 2 (rule # 1 is showing up for the event): "Know thy bicycle". And most important, rule # 3: "Know when and how to attack". Rule # 345 in the Tourmalet chapter: "If you see sheep on the road up to the Tourmalet, don't race them, because they don't know anything about cycling".

Vino cares not for your silly rules!

Anyway, for what it's worth I think the argument could be a semi-interesting one with the right approach, which I think is: "Without that incident they'd have the same time, that means they're real close, maybe we shouldn't count on Andy always losing big time in the ITTs, and as a 25-year-old he should have more room for improvement than an almost 28-year-old. This should be more interesting next time."

It'll also make for excellent teasing material to throw at Andy when he retires.

 

[Comeback 2011]

Andy in his post race interview practically thanked Alberto for not sprinting, acknowledging he (AC) did the gentlemanly thing after Andy was out front the whole climb. Had he sprinted he might have picked up a few seconds and most surely the stage win. That's why it was all hugs, back slaps and winks at the end of the stage.

No he told Schleck he wasn't going to sprint for it to avoid the humilation of being beaten. If he hadn't then Schleck would have gone for it too.

That was a mistake by AC because we now know Schleck is the true winner of the Tour de France.

 

[Publicus]

Vino cares not for your silly rules!

Anyway, for what it's worth I think the argument could be a semi-interesting one with the right approach, which I think is: "Without that incident they'd have the same time, that means they're real close, maybe we shouldn't count on Andy always losing big time in the ITTs, and as a 25-year-old he should have more room for improvement than an almost 28-year-old. This should be more interesting next time."

It'll also make for excellent teasing material to throw at Andy when he retires.

I don't think you can say that. Without the incident, then the stages that followed may have been raced differently. Contador may have been more aggressive on Tourmalet, for example. And Andy may not have elected to attack so early on Tourmalet. The race unfolded the way it unfolded. If you attempt to change one variable, you cannot assume that it would unfold the same way.

Not a dig at you, just I don't think it is easy to project how things would have played out. But I do agree that Andy has much more upside than AC at this point. Next year's Tour (if AC rides it) should be very interesting.

 

[hrotha]

I don't think you can say that. Without the incident, then the stages that followed may have been raced differently. Contador may have been more aggressive on Tourmalet, for example. And Andy may not have elected to attack so early on Tourmalet. The race unfolded the way it unfolded. If you attempt to change one variable, you cannot assume that it would unfold the same way.

Not a dig at you, just I don't think it is easy to project how things would have played out. But I do agree that Andy has much more upside than AC at this point. Next year's Tour (if AC rides it) should be very interesting.

Yeah, I actually agree with you and made a similar post a few pages ago. I meant just for comparison purposes, it's exactly the same if they have the same time, if Contador is 39 seconds ahead or 39 seconds behind Andy. Point is, damn it's close.

 

[Franklin]

That was a mistake by AC because we now know Schleck is the true winner of the Tour de France.

Uhuh Thats why Schleck will be getting the top spot and the final yellow


Virtual wins: The remedy for fanboy pain since 1991.

 

[khodder]

There are too many variables to speculate. But can you imagine the racing down Champs Elyesses with the Yellow Jersey compeition tied on time.

 

[richwagmn]

You're right don't know how I Fugged that one up, but I did. My apologies. But it still changes absolutely nothing. This is, in all actuality, a very silly argument. And as henryg said above. It's not a matter of what if's.
Andy has TdF titles in his future, you can bet on that. And, as he, himself said. If he doesn't pull it out, it wasn't meant to happen.
________________________________________________________________
Better to ask for forgiveness, than to ask for permission.

Pleast stop sizing your text larger. Trying bolding instead.

 

[skidmark]

I don't think you can say that. Without the incident, then the stages that followed may have been raced differently. Contador may have been more aggressive on Tourmalet, for example. And Andy may not have elected to attack so early on Tourmalet. The race unfolded the way it unfolded. If you attempt to change one variable, you cannot assume that it would unfold the same way.

Not a dig at you, just I don't think it is easy to project how things would have played out. But I do agree that Andy has much more upside than AC at this point. Next year's Tour (if AC rides it) should be very interesting.

Although I totally agree that forecasting race conditions on 'what ifs' is a useless practice, it's hard to see how it would have changed things in the following stages. There were 3 stages between 'chaingate' and the TT, and the Pau stage was always going to be useless for GC with the finish so far away. It would be hard for me to be convinced that, were the positions reversed on the Tourmalet, Contador could have dropped Andy, and obviously Andy couldn't drop Contador. And of course the other one was a flat stage. So, even if they didn't have as big a lead on the other contenders (ie. if Schleck hadn't attacked from as far out), there would probably still be 31 seconds separating them going into the TT. And that would have been an awesome nail biter. Too bad.

Geez, why did I just write a long paragraph on something I self-described as useless?

 

[Publicus]

Although I totally agree that forecasting race conditions on 'what ifs' is a useless practice, it's hard to see how it would have changed things in the following stages. There were 3 stages between 'chaingate' and the TT, and the Pau stage was always going to be useless for GC with the finish so far away. It would be hard for me to be convinced that, were the positions reversed on the Tourmalet, Contador could have dropped Andy, and obviously Andy couldn't drop Contador. And of course the other one was a flat stage. So, even if they didn't have as big a lead on the other contenders (ie. if Schleck hadn't attacked from as far out), there would probably still be 31 seconds separating them going into the TT. And that would have been an awesome nail biter. Too bad.

Geez, why did I just write a long paragraph on something I self-described as useless?

All of that being said, it was all in Andy's hands. Literally.

 

[El Pistolero]

Yeah, I actually agree with you and made a similar post a few pages ago. I meant just for comparison purposes, it's exactly the same if they have the same time, if Contador is 39 seconds ahead or 39 seconds behind Andy. Point is, damn it's close.

Yeah, if Chaingate didn't happen this could perhaps have been the closest TdF win EVER, but we'll never know.

 

[spectacle]

Which, coincidentally, is when Alberto Contador started winning his TdFs and the other two grand tours.

Since I've heard this song before I presume you're going to succeed it all with calls for "fair play" (whatever that is) and making sure the parish is aware of your "neutrality" and your "I hate no niggaz" attitude.

God allmighty!

no, its when operation puerto happened and jan ullrich was exposed as a doper.

Andy Schleck did not wait for Chavanel when he had a mechanical during stage 3.

Take your hypocrisy elsewhere please.

Most people said Contador would lose a lot of time on the cobbles because his team wasn't good enough on the cobbles. Every GC contender would have been able to gain a lot of time on that stage if they could suck Cancellara's wheel. And Cancellara most definitely started to increase his tempo when all important GC contenders were stuck behind Frank Schleck's crash.

Andy's chain dropped because of HIS fault, I think that's proven now after it almost happened again this Time Trial. And Alberto only needed 31/32 seconds in this Time Trial if the chain didn't drop. Not 39... You know, you can win a Tour with a second He didn't need 39 seconds, but 31/32 seconds.

andy did not attack chavenal. andy was already well ahead him, when the first of chavenal's three bike changes happened. andy never increased his speed --he was riding at the same speed pretty much throughout the stage. here's a thought, before you talk $hit next time, why not test your theory first, and see if you even can increase your speed on cobbles, before you accuse others of doing so. there is only one way to ride the cobbles--you have to ride hard, at the front, and not stop, while praying to whatever deity you think cares about you, that you don't have a mechanical. everyone knew that going into that stage. and everyone prepared for that as best they could by placing mechanics all over the course that day.

plus, the only reason chavenal was even in yellow was because fabian forfeited it to him by neutralizing stage 2. had fabian not neutralized stage two, chavanel would not have been in yellow, and he would have lost a hell of lot more 3-4 minutes, because he would have had to wait for several small eternities for his team car each time he needed to change his bike, instead of getting to have the first car in the line as the yellow-jersey-by-default.

all this talk about the chain drop being andy's fault is beside the point--when jan rode off the mountain that day it was because he sucked as a descender, and he clearly over shot the turn. but so what? nowhere does it say that sportsmanship is only owed to those who play no role in their own misfortune. misfortune is often partly or entirely the result of one's own actions, but that isn't the point--the point is that a true champion doesn't want to win because someone shot a corner, or slipped a gear, or dropped a chain, two and half weeks into in a three week bike race. a true champion knows that "but for the grace of god go i"--unless of course he doesn't believe that he really is the best and the strongest. and in that case, he has a choice to make, concede with honor, or win without it. alberto chose the latter.

paul sherwin for once in his ridiculous career got it right--alberto behaved like a desperate man, not like a champion, and now everyone else is free to discount the quality of his win because of it (or not). if you have no problem with it, fine--but don't slag andy or anyone else to make it seem any less sleazy than it was.

like i said, i really could care less who won, but that doesn't mean that i can't judge how that win was accomplished.

 

[spectacle]

What if Andy's chain had fallen off during the time trial and not during the mountain stage? What would the "unwritten rules" require Alberto to do then? Same mechanical, same amount of time lost etc. Does anybody seriously think Alberto should stop his TT bike in the middle of the road and wait?

time trials are not races against other riders, they are races against the clock. so, no, no one has to stop their time trial because another rider has a problem. but the truth is, no one has to be sporting ever, that is the true value of sportsmanship. it is a test and mark of character. i'm truly sorry that you do not seem to understand that--more so for those who must deal with you in real life than for you personally, but i am also a little sad for you as well.

sportsmanship is about equity, and different types of stages, just like different types of disciplines, have, over the years, developed different types of equity. equity has no bright lines, no black and white. it is a misty realm where one is always seeking the lightest, brightest shade of grey. sportsmanship isn't about rules that are analogous to laws. its about doing the right thing, and not taking advantage, and being fair, and acting honorably... because you want to, not because you have to; because it is the right thing to do, not because it is the required thing to do.

 

[spectacle]

Were you crying about it when Roche and Mottet attacked and cost Bernard his victory in 1987?

i thought it was delgado and roche who took advantage of bernard's puncture, not roche and mottet. but yeah, it was sh!tty.

mottet is one of my all time favorite riders, he seems to me to have been one of the truly decent, clean riders--i hope i am right how i remember events.

 

[El Pistolero]

no genius, its when operation puerto happened and jan ullrich was exposed as a doper.



andy did not attack chavenal. andy was already well ahead him, when the first of chavenal's of three bike changes happened. andy never increased his speed --he was riding at the same speed pretty much throughout the stage. here's a thought, before you talk $hit next time, why not test your theory first, and see if you even can increase your speed on cobbles, before you accuse others of doing so. there is only one way to ride the cobbles--you have to ride hard, at the front, and not stop, while praying to whatever deity you think cares about you, that you don't have a mechanical. everyone knew that going into that stage. and everyone prepared for that as best they could by placing mechanics all over the course that day.

plus, the only reason chavenal was even in yellow was because fabian forfeited it to him by neutralizing stage 2. had fabian not neutralized stage two, chavanel would not have been in yellow, and he would have lost a hell of lot more 3-4 minutes, because he would have had to wait for several small eternities for his team car each time he needed to change his bike, instead of getting to have the first car in the line as the yellow-jersey-by-default.

all this talk about the chain drop being andy's fault is beside the point--when jan rode off the mountain that day it was because he sucked as a descender, and he clearly over shot the turn. but so what? nowhere does it say that sportsmanship is only owed to those who play no role in their own misfortune. misfortune is often partly or entirely the result of one's own actions, but that isn't the point--the point is that a true champion doesn't want to win because someone shot a corner, or slipped a gear, or dropped a chain, two and half weeks into in a 3 week bike race. because a true champion knows but for the grace of god go i--unless of course he doesn't believe that he really is the best and the strongest. and in that case, he has a choice to make, concede with honor, or win without it. alberto chose the latter.

paul sherwin for once in his ridiculous career got it right--alberto behaved like a desperate man, not like a champion, and everyone else is free to discount the quality of his win because of it (or not). if you have no problem with it, fine--but don't slag andy or anyone else to make is seem any less sleazy than it was. nut up or shut up: embrace the sleaziness of it and say it doesn't bother you, or shut the f#ck up.

like i said, i really could care less who won, but that doesn't mean i can't judge how that win was accomplished. and whether you believe me about that or not, isn't going to cost me any lost sleep.

Fabian Cancellara started to increase tempo after Frank Schleck's crash. Perhaps you should sleep better at night and pay a little more attention during a race before making observations. Of course Andy didn't attack on the cobbles. That's because he sucks at the cobbles and couldn't attack on it, all he could was suck Cancellara's wheel.

Thing is, it's been proven that Andy's chain falling off was his OWN fault and not some act of god. If you can't shift don't fucking complain about it afterwards. Contador had every right to attack Andy after his chain fell off. Just like Andy had the right not to wait for Contador after he was held back because of Frank Schleck's crash. Not to forget the mechanical Contador had near the end of the finish on stage 3 losing another 10-20 seconds.

Just out of curiosity, who do you find a great champion in cycling?

Eddy Merckx? He would have done the same(said so him self). Only he wouldn't have gifted Andy a stage win and he wouldn't have apologized either.
Hinault? He would have done the same(said so him self), and his fifth win is one of the most controversial ones in the history of the TdF anyway.

etc

 

[spectacle]

blah blah blah my reading comprehension skills are poor and my self delusion is high blah blah blah

Just out of curiosity, who do you find a great champion in cycling?

blah blah blah.

etc

miguel indurian (even if he doped)

 

[derailleur]

Andy and Contador would have summited together and marked each other on the descent. The others who broke with Contador would have gained 39 seconds if they still broke, and it wouldn't make a difference, but they'd be pilloried in the press.

On the mountaintop finish Schleck would have attacked early and hard to extend his lead, knowing he couldn't win the TT. Contador would have been confident of his time-trialing and marked Andy instead of attacking, until the very end where he would have contested the sprint and taken the stage win but no time.

In the TT, without the belly full of anger and the time to make up, Schleck would not have ridden as fast. Contador, having time to make up, might have ridden even faster. The 39 seconds wouldn't be all the difference made up, and Contador would have won the tour by 10+ seconds.

The podium would look the same, but it wouldn't feel the same.

 

[delbified]

Contador, having time to make up, might have ridden even faster. The 39 seconds wouldn't be all the difference made up, and Contador would have won the tour by 10+ seconds.

contador admitted he had nothing left in the tank at the end of his TT.