'The Old Contador is gone' Claim

[Jason_Mercier]

Not an indication of the form, which is a key aspect

 

[Carols]

I respect you and all forum members. You treat all the things enthusiastically 'cos entertaining battles (with absolutely any winner) is something we are interested more that in just fact of Contador wins and I appreciate it, but there is the other type of fans too so I expressed my opinion and we can discuss if someone disagrees.

Offensive? No problem. Put me in ignore. Miburo [the most die hard fan] apparently already did it. Why does the forum exist if some posters want to read only the things they like?

I have you on ignore dear, but people keep quoting you, so I see it anyway

Why don't you take it up privately with the two or so posters you have an issue with?

 

[Taxus4a]

Some here even say Contador will never be the same as he was in the giro '11. Without going into clinic-mode but 'it' already happened then. Ridiculous, Contador has as much reason to 'clinic' now than he has in '11. Seriously what has changed since then?

There are some things that have changed for everybody and especially for him of course, the is a new cycling and a new Contador.
This Contador is going to be better compare with some riders and worse compared with other riders.
It is still going to be very strong and world reference, but there are some people that could beate him in places he was unbeateable except something rare.
Of course he is not going to repeat or even getting close permomances in W/kg as Verbier, or even Alp dhuez. Times has changed although he is at Riis side.

Answering about Tour of Oman, for Contador Frebuary and March has been always very important, and Oman was his second Tour, for Froome and Evans the first one.

 

[Carols]

Not an indication of the form, which is a key aspect

Well current form and confidence level is always the missing factor. So we need to extrapolate from last performance, what work has been done since then, any quotes from a rider, the parcours in combination with proven class, experience and talent.

Then you put your money down; but it's called gambling for a reason

 

[airstream]

I have you on ignore dear, but people keep quoting you, so I see it anyway

Why don't you take it up privately with the two or so posters you have an issue with?

Because I'm interested what forumities think on that. They are not 2 3 or 5

 

[Publicus]

It has zero impact on things happening on the road.

No disrespect but this is silly. Past events DO have an impact on what is happening on the road. Heck you even alluded to it above. Where you and the other poster make the snide comment that AC doesn't care about Froome beating him in Oman. He's a competitor so of course it affects him (i.e., he cares) and that effects his training and motivation going into the NEXT race.

The further back in time you go, the less impact prior events have on the present or future, but to suggest there is NO impact, just defies logic.

 

[Netserk]

Thus Contador opponents have improved a lot in the last years and Contador is not the same Contador of other times in February. Which is enough to suspect he will not reach the 2009 or 2011 level on this season. But you fans seems that u dont take it in count writtting that Alberto has always been the best GT Contender. WTF. And the sky was always clear until it rained for the first time.

2011

2009

2008

Your arguments makes me laugh. When a good shape Contador lost a important race against true opponents at the beginning of a season (first months) ? The question is: Was Contador in Omán in worse shape than Froome or Joaquim Rodríguez?

1st quote: You claim that Contador this February wasn't at the same level as previously.

2nd quote: I show you how good Contador previously has been in February.

3rd quote: You apparently think that Contador getting 2nd in Oman behind Froome, is worse than Contador getting 3rd on Malhao behind Cummings.

Have I claimed that Contador was in worse shape than Froome or Purito? No.

Have I shown that Contador in his most impressive years was mediocre in February? Yes.

 

[airstream]

No disrespect but this is silly. Past events DO have an impact on what is happening on the road. Heck you even alluded to it above.

No one neglects factor of experience. It can work and can not work too. Yes, if contention is very tight, it can play even a decisive role sometimes. BUT, if we abstractedly look into say Ax-3-Domaines stage, the fact that Contador has more titles helps him in now way. It can not add him extra power, can not make him stronger if he is weaker actually and so on.

. Where you and the other poster make the snide comment that AC doesn't care about Froome beating him in Oman.

There is nothing snidee. Someone suggested to discuss Contador's strength isolately from his rivals. It is an utopian business a priori because a picture that we observe is painted by many riders, not only by Contador.

 

[Netserk]

edit: And btw if anyone needs to improve tactics, it's froome. He looked like a total amateur on the vuelta mountains tactics-wise

on the contrary, froome did great in the first week but was a total amateur in stage 7 which was incidentally a flat stage. It all went downhill from there as the effects of the tour - olympics - vuelta took its toll.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ta6ytiwb-c

yup, that's stage 8, the day after his exhaustion came in, triggered by burning himself up for that fail leadout for ben swift.

Just 2 days before that he was doing this to contador:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beb0ixnoknw

If you had read my post more carefully, you would have noticed that I didn't comment on Froome's form nor ability on stage 8. I only commented on his tactics. Does the fact that he used energy the day before, mean that he was less capable of decent tactics in the final of a MTF?

When you are clearly better you don't need tactics (especially the way Jaca was ridden). But on a longer MTF with four more or less equal riders, tactics are very important. Froome made a lot of tactical mistakes on the climb. I'm not criticizing him for not pushing 5% more watts. I'm criticizing him for riding tactically as an amateur.

 

[Publicus]

No one neglects factor of experience. It can work and can not work too. Yes, if contention is very tight, it can play even a decisive role sometimes. BUT, if we abstractedly look into say Ax-3-Domaines stage, the fact that Contador has more titles helps him in now way. It can not add him extra power, can not make him stronger if he is weaker actually and so on.


There is nothing snidee. Someone suggested to discuss Contador's strength isolately from his rivals. It is an utopian business a priori because a picture that we observe is painted by many riders, not only by Contador.

Stay focused champ. You are dancing all over the place to maintain the validity of your argument. First no one is arguing that past wins helps with power, etc., so stop insulting folks' intelligence. Second, the winning of the past titles does influence events like Ax-3 because it drives how his competitors react/plan tactically and it aides AC mentally. Honestly, I don't know why you persist with this belief (maybe you really do believe people believe the first point), but it's not helping your credibility around here (IMHO).

The snide comment reference was to demonstrate that past events can and do impact present/future events. Also agree that determining any cyclist strength requires comparison to his contemporaries--context is everything.

 

[Jason_Mercier]

Have I shown that Contador in his most impressive years was mediocre in February? Yes.

No in a important race and not in a good shape. I never saw a good form Contador lost clearly against a opponent of the TDF in one of the first important races of the year. Never (PN 09 is an exception because of his huge collapse) And thanks Oman didnt have an ITT.
Responding your arguments Algarve was his first race of 2011. He wasnt at good shape there. Nothing to do with Oman. If you think i am stupid or you can disguise the truth then i say u are absolutely wrong.

 

[Netserk]

No in a important race and not in a good shape. I never saw a good form Contador lost clearly against a opponent of the TDF in one of the first important races of the year. Never (PN 09 is an exception because of his huge collapse) And thanks Oman didnt have an ITT.
Responding your arguments Algarve was his first race of 2011. He wasnt at good shape there. Nothing to do with Oman. If you think i am stupid or you can disguise the truth then i say u are absolutely wrong.

We're still discussing February, right?

If Contador at San Luis this year was a 3 on a scale from 1-10, and his Giro '11 was a 10, which level would you say that Contador was at Oman?

 

[Jason_Mercier]

I wanted to say first important races not February. I cant tell you in which level was Contador in Oman. What i am sure of is that he was in good form after a week of racing in San Luis and he arrived at Oman in a similar shape on Froome, Rodríguez or Nibali.

 

[airstream]

Second, the winning of the past titles does influence events like Ax-3 because it drives how his competitors react/plan tactically and it aides AC mentally. Honestly, I don't know why you persist with this belief (maybe you really do believe people believe the first point), but it's not helping your credibility around here (IMHO).

I'm sure they are many people who share all of 3 points.

What credibility can you offer?

The snide comment reference was to demonstrate that past events can and do impact present/future events. Also agree that determining any cyclist strength requires comparison to his contemporaries--context is everything.

Not so much as many poster rely on it. It is a botomless chain.

A better climber and a better TT - it's ok. everyone is happy;
Froome hit the picture (a TT threat) - Contador is waay better climber etc.
Rodriguez beat Contador in the high mountains - instant excuse about off-form suspension and quite SNIDE remark about Rodriguez who is not a man of Tour calibre (BUT, the details of the 2011 Giro are relished with such a huge enthusiasm as though the rest guys were supermen of TdF calibre)
Froome splitted Contador in halves on Green mountains - no problem, Contador was there to test himself. He is off form;

And this will not end. If he loses the Tour, new excuses will hurry up to be found.

 

[Netserk]

I wanted to say first important races not February. I cant tell you in which level was Contador in Oman. What i am sure of is that he was in good form after a week of racing in San Luis and he arrived at Oman in a similar shape on Froome, Rodríguez or Nibali.

First important race for Contador is T-A.

 

[airstream]

This is totally wrong. Past performance is crucial information for predicting future performance.

The last perfomances is a base on all perceptions and evaluations. Froome's chances are already estimated as very close to Contador's chances, despite he has much less merits. In case Froome will win Tirreno, he will become the 1st favorite. For everyone, but those who compare palmares as a key yardstick and entirely rely on reasonings about ephemeral surreal mentality, a winner spirit, prep specially for le Tour etc.

 

[Telmisartan new]

I'm a poster with my own vision.

How modest and humble you are.

 

[airstream]

I'm criticizing him for riding tactically as an amateur.

Contador could easily drop autocratically at Galibier say from 4 k to go and finish obviously better than Zubeldia or Taarmae. Amateur mistake, no? You forgive risk for Contador and unsparingly criticise [wittingly or unwittingly] Froome for very similar case.

It's a kaleidoscope out of such subtle fluctuations of power. No one knows how he will feel in 30 sec and hence mistakes are inevitable.

 

[Publicus]

I'm sure they are many people who share all of 3 points.

What credibility can you offer?


Not so much as many poster rely on it. It is a botomless chain.

A better climber and a better TT - it's ok. everyone is happy;
Froome hit the picture (a TT threat) - Contador is waay better climber etc.
Rodriguez beat Contador in the high mountains - instant excuse about off-form suspension and quite SNIDE remark about Rodriguez who is not a man of Tour calibre (BUT, the details of the 2011 Giro are relished with such a huge enthusiasm as though the rest guys were supermen of TdF calibre)
Froome splitted Contador in halves on Green mountains - no problem, Contador was there to test himself. He is off form;

And this will not end. If he loses the Tour, new excuses will hurry up to be found.

]
1. Who are these people that share all 3 beliefs as you've outlined them, because I will join you in mocking them. As for credibility, nothing but the logic I've laid out. Your "theory" is predicated on mischaracterizing or misunderstanding folks views about Contador--at least that's the only plausible explanation I have at the moment.

2. As for why Contador does not prevail in certain situations since coming off suspension, it is what it is. You don't have to give an credence to them, but they are factors. I'm personally reserving judgement on the question until I see how he rides in July (after a normal season of build up) versus coming off of suspension and only 4 days of racing before tackling a GT--which even you would argue is not optimal preparation for a GT.

 

[Angliru]

The last perfomances is a base on all perceptions and evaluations. Froome's chances are already estimated as very close to Contador's chances, despite he has much less merits. In case Froome will win Tirreno, he will become the 1st favorite. For everyone, but those who compare palmares as a key yardstick and entirely rely on reasonings about ephemeral surreal mentality, a winner spirit, prep specially for le Tour etc.

I have to ask this question. You promote yourself as this unbiased individual that purely cares about the good competition within the sport and in terms of the forum discussion, you essentially just want a good debate/dialogue. From your posts in reference to the "biased Contador fanboys/girls", one could fairly accurately state that you don't respect the basis for the arguments that they post and as such this has been your MO from day one. Isn't it time that you realized that the dialogue has really become a monologue and that nothing is to be gained from continuing further in this direction? Do you think it is your mission to rescue them from themselves or is it that you feel that you're doing the forum a public service by continually combating their every post with the same rhetoric?

This has been ongoing since you arrived. Initially your reasoning was that you felt the need to come to the rescue of Andy due to, in your opinion, the large contingent of anti-Andy posts on the forum. Then you became the defender of Andy AND the chief party in the tearing down of Contador and those that chose to show support for him and his exploits. Now you've bailed on Andy and Frank (it was a package deal) and have taken up with Froome and created this imaginary scenario where he is the new rider that is beset upon by the unruly mobs. On your white horse you come, defending his honor while the Contadorians flail about in denial (as you say), blind to the facts that Contador is but a fraction of what he used to be and due to fall from his perch as the king of the grand tours, knocked down a peg or 2 by Froome.

Since you have such little regard for the extreme opinions of those that are the object of your scorn and derision why not just not respond to their posts that cause you to go off on your tirades? I would think that you would much prefer to direct your energies in a more meaningful dialogue than the obviously losing proposition of converting those that have shown that they aren't likely to alter their emotion based opinions. Or is that you enjoy bashing your head against a wall?

 

[airstream]

]
1. Who are these people that share all 3 beliefs as you've outlined them, because I will join you in mocking them. As for credibility, nothing but the logic I've laid out. Your "theory" is predicated on mischaracterizing or misunderstanding folks views about Contador--at least that's the only plausible explanation I have at the moment.

Surely because we are on opposite sides in opinions.

2. As for why Contador does not prevail in certain situations since coming off suspension, it is what it is. You don't have to give an credence to them, but they are factors. I'm personally reserving judgement on the question until I see how he rides in July (after a normal season of build up) versus coming off of suspension and only 4 days of racing before tackling a GT--which even you would argue is not optimal preparation for a GT.

The fact Valverde rode an intense Tour doesn't confuse you? Is it a good preparation for the Tour too? Valverde did the Vuelta as one big experiment, having decided to ride it the week before the start. And Valverde did the Vuelta on Contador level on all counts. Yeah, Alex Valverde, who people rated much lower than Contador as a GT rider. And it is something you won't be able to explain. I am not saying suspension didn't affect or so, but you [fans] are so addicted to idea [not fact] of Contador's vast superiority, that absolutize this suspencion as though it is only key reason. Really good excuse to try to explain the situation you disliked by and large.

 

[Red Rick]

I don't think the Vuelta was bad in terms of overall level. Collada de Gallina, the only climb without a whole lot of stop and go climbing, was done at 6,4 W/k

 

[Publicus]

Surely because we are on opposite sides in opinions.

The fact Valverde rode an intense Tour doesn't confuse you? Is it a good preparation for the Tour too? Valverde did the Vuelta as one big experiment, having decided to ride it the week before the start. And Valverde did the Vuelta on Contador level on all counts. Yeah, Alex Valverde, who people rated much lower than Contador as a GT rider. And it is something you won't be able to explain. I am not saying suspension didn't affect or so, but you [fans] are so addicted to idea [not fact] of Contador's vast superiority, that absolutize this suspencion as though it is only key reason. Really good excuse to try to explain the situation you disliked by and large.

No, it's not because we are on opposite sides of the discussion. I've demonstrated the flaws in the positions as you've articulated them. You were supposed to offering me examples of people that hold all 3 opinions as YOU'VE articulated them.

As for Valverde, not sure what that has to do with what I proffered. I didn't make any arguments about where Contador stands for the reasons I've explained. Valverde and his performance at the Vuelta doesn't alter my decision to hold off on making a declaration. I am surely a big fan of Contador but you do yourself a disservice by attempting to lump me and others together because we are fans of his riding. So while I'm sure you felt really confident and self-assured when you made the bolded comment, it really is just your own projection and not in anyway predicated on anything I've said to you today as part of this discussion. I'm more than happy to defend or expound upon things I've actually written. I will politely decline the offer to defend things from your fevered imagination or that others have proffered (I will that for them to defend).

 

[airstream]

No, it's not because we are on opposite sides of the discussion. I've demonstrated the flaws in the positions as you've articulated them. You were supposed to offering me examples of people that hold all 3 opinions as YOU'VE articulated them.

As for Valverde, not sure what that has to do with what I proffered. I didn't make any arguments about where Contador stands for the reasons I've explained. Valverde and his performance at the Vuelta doesn't alter my decision to hold off on making a declaration. I am surely a big fan of Contador but you do yourself a disservice by attempting to lump me and others together because we are fans of his riding. So while I'm sure you felt really confident and self-assured when you made the bolded comment, it really is just your own projection and not in anyway predicated on anything I've said to you today as part of this discussion. I'm more than happy to defend or expound upon things I've actually written. I will politely decline the offer to defend things from your fevered imagination or that others have proffered (I will that for them to defend).

I didn't notice any flaws. They will call themselves.

To call other's thoughts a 'fever imagination' is really polite way to conduct discussion. Great.

And any of you dared to accuse me of insulting?

 

[Publicus]

I didn't notice any flaws. They will call themselves.

To call other's thoughts a 'fever imagination' is really polite way to conduct discussion. Great.

And any of you dared to accuse me of insulting?

Well this has been fun. Thanks Airstream. If and when you want to actually have a discussion instead of spout off random thoughts unconnected to anything actually discussed in my post, I'm more than happy to engage.

Post script: If you are going to attribute comments to me that I've not made or implied by my own words, then I feel justified in describing them as originating from your fevered imagination. Take it as an insult if you like, but it is a direct result from your own controllable actions.

Post script script: I should note, saying your argument is flawed is not an insult. There were flaws in your logic/position that I pointed out. If you want to explain why those flaws are in fact accurate (and there not flaws), then I'm more than happy to reconsider my initial position.