stefrees said:
That's just like reading an Aussie cricket journalist before the last ashes series.
The Australian cricket team suck. That's an Aussies honest opinion. Take the team from 2001-2004 however...now contrast with England's best over the last 20 years. They'd lose every test. Every test. Heck the ashes win in 2005...last test final man out...Michael Kasprowicz wasn't out. How many runs did we lose by? That's right less than five. England were gifted an Ashes win by a bad umpire call. Oh and they all received medals from the Queen. How quaint and nice. Knighthoods! Yay! Maybe you can crack a fat when the Plastic Brits bring home some medals hey in the chavtastic Olympics!!! Gotta love pommie fanboys. Always good to get a rise out of...but of course, you're not a Wiggins Sky fanboy are you? Oh, hate to burst your bubble champ, Sky is owned by an Aussie and his company that started in the Land Down Under...lest we forget.
Oh and Hitch...don't think I don't know what you were doing.
You spend so much time on here and yet for someone supposedly so informed, at times you can act so daft. Still living in the UK? Perhaps the English air is getting to you? Perhaps a holiday is Spain is a good idea?
Now where were we... 2008 Alpe d'Huez versus 2011 Alpe d'Huez. Contrast each year. Repeat. Look at times. Sheesh dude it's clear as day. Evans time was about the same both years in his ascent. Difference was his performance overall and the competition. Hence the contrast...it gives perspective. That's why he won. Fastest time last year was over a minute slower than Sastre's time. Now observe all his major opposition during both years and how they raced throughout the race.
That's also why Andy Schleck had one super day last year and on that day Evans pulled an entire peloton up the hill after Andy. Andy's form was better in previous years and was questioned on every thread on the forum last year during the Tour. Evans actually improved. He normally had a bad day that cost him precious time. It was obvious he'd win the Tour after Alpe. Franck was crying at the finish, he knew they'd lost the race. That's because the dynamics from previous years changed. Evans learnt what he needed to fix, Schleck however has not. Nor has Wiggins shown he has learnt and improved where it's needed as well. As for Evans riding when the whole peloton was after Andy the day before...Franck did what? Put a few seconds into Cadel at the end. Only rider who could. Hardly convincing evidence of superiority.
The hand waving...that was simple and easily understandable. Andy wanted Cadel to do what he did in 2008 and try and chase the guys up front. It was a bluff. Difference was, AC and Samu weren't going to win the Tour. Cadel knew this, knew how strong Andy was in relation to himself and said no. I thought it was hilarious. Big tell. Massive psychological tell. Evans read him like an open book and thus the bluff, although a ploy, amounted to nothing. Contador in Giro form would have looked at Cadel and just rode straight past him. he'd offer no hand gesture. Andy wanted the leader on the road to act irrationally and hopefully blow...as he's done in the past.
That right there was the very thing people had been alluding to about Andy Schleck on this forum. That winning edge and having it in spades and knowing when to deliver. The imperative to read your opponent and know what to do. He was clasping straws right then and the reaction of both Schlecks at the stage end proves this. They knew they'd lost. Every action on the road is revealing to a degree. So in essence, the pace up Alpe d'Huez by the first three riders into Paris, was set by Evans because the Schlecks went at the same place. They all finished together. Contrast with 2008. Big difference. Superior one year, equal the other. I'd happily wager Cadel could have gone faster last year judging by how much energy he had in his chrono afterwards. He simply didn't need to. Marked his man, went same pace, beat him. All parties knew who won that day.
That's how you win a GT. That's what I was alluding to. It's why some guys if they turn up and are in form, are naturally favourites. Wiggins isn't one of them. Until you show you can, then you shouldn't be lauded by cycling fans as a big favourite. Wiggins is an outsider. A very, very big outsider. Oh and if you want to imply a rider having one good day is a sign they are amazing, who was it who finished in front of your boy Samu and AC? Blew straight past them both on Alpe. He's not a superior climber, but taking outright effort over that specific stages early terrain, entire race and recent prior races, it's understandable both Spaniards failed to win on one of the most iconic finishes in cycling. Plenty of riders finish stages alongside favourites, or in front of them. Doesn't make them equal in skill for that terrain. It's about consistency over time. Cadel won last year because he was the most consistent rider. I'd even go as far to say Cadel was on par with Andy climbing. First week he was definitely superior. Heck Thor Hushovd was superior to Andy. That's what makes cycling so dynamic and interesting to watch. People's form and seeing how they peak. The ups and the downs. The drama and tension on the road.
Now what would have happened if Andy didn't dance off after Alberto earlier on the stage to Alpe d'Huez? I'd think he'd have had some more energy left, but it wouldn't have mattered. Also consider Voeckler. If he'd have dropped back with Evans, he would definitely have made the podium. I have no doubt he lost too much time on Alpe d'Huez because of his earlier actions trying to chase on his own AC and Andy.
For what it is worth, Samu is a big chance for doing well this year. More so than Wiggins. Definite podium material.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram