The Tour Ladder

[baronofbeef]

I'm not sure how Michael Rogers ended up on a watch list of potential Tour winners. Might as well add Tom Danielson (all hope, no confirmation). At least Cunego, Vande Velde and Leipheimer have some credible grand tour performances to their names, despite the fact that I cannot see any of them winning either. So far, Rogers is about 2 steps below those guys who I consider second string - capable of big rides to keep up with favorites but not really ever going to drop anyone. He is a very good rider, but he has never shown any capacity to win the Tour and it is almost unfair to hype him that way.

I also can't believe how people are dissing Armstrong's return performances. He is starting at near neo-pro level and finished 12th in a tough Giro after a collarbone fracture a month earlier. This would be hailed as miraculous by a new rider. He really is a machine and he may just find the top level again.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure how Michael Rogers ended up on a watch list of potential Tour winners. Might as well add Tom Danielson (all hope, no confirmation). At least Cunego, Vande Velde and Leipheimer have some credible grand tour performances to their names, despite the fact that I cannot see any of them winning either. So far, Rogers is about 2 steps below those guys who I consider second string - capable of big rides to keep up with favorites but not really ever going to drop anyone. He is a very good rider, but he has never shown any capacity to win the Tour and it is almost unfair to hype him that way.

I also can't believe how people are dissing Armstrong's return performances. He is starting at near neo-pro level and finished 12th in a tough Giro after a collarbone fracture a month earlier. This would be hailed as miraculous by a new rider. He really is a machine and he may just find the top level again.

Uh.....no, he won't.

 

[elapid]

I'm not sure how Michael Rogers ended up on a watch list of potential Tour winners. Might as well add Tom Danielson (all hope, no confirmation). At least Cunego, Vande Velde and Leipheimer have some credible grand tour performances to their names, despite the fact that I cannot see any of them winning either. So far, Rogers is about 2 steps below those guys who I consider second string - capable of big rides to keep up with favorites but not really ever going to drop anyone. He is a very good rider, but he has never shown any capacity to win the Tour and it is almost unfair to hype him that way.

I also can't believe how people are dissing Armstrong's return performances. He is starting at near neo-pro level and finished 12th in a tough Giro after a collarbone fracture a month earlier. This would be hailed as miraculous by a new rider. He really is a machine and he may just find the top level again.

What? So Armstrong is a legend for getting 12th in the Giro after 3 years off, and Rogers is second tier after finishing 8th in the Giro after almost 2 years off because of injuries and mononucleosis? He is triple world champion in the time trial and half decent in the mountains. He has way more credibility than Leipheimer the limpet (especially as he seems to have peaked earlier in the season), Cunego (who has never performed well in the TdF and is now off the juice), and Vande Velde (who has a one-off good performance in the TdF and is coming back from injury at the Giro). He is a better time trialler than either of the Schleck brothers and also Sastre. He also has a very strong team behind him. Don't forget Rogers was virtual leader of the TdF in 2007 before crashing out. Rogers has the credentials to finish on the podium and I am pretty sure being on the CN top-12 list will not put too much pressure on him!

 

[BroDeal]

Rogers has the credentials to finish on the podium and I am pretty sure being on the CN top-12 list will not put too much pressure on him!

I don't know about that. I have a hard time seeing Rogers on the podium of a GT. He is a level below Evans. Maybe he will surprise but he seems like the type of rider who is guaranteed to have at least one bad day in the mountains.

I hope Riis has put A. Schleck through intensive time trial training.

 

[elapid]

I don't know about that. I have a hard time seeing Rogers on the podium of a GT. He is a level below Evans. Maybe he will surprise but he seems like the type of rider who is guaranteed to have at least one bad day in the mountains.

I hope Riis has put A. Schleck through intensive time trial training.

Do you have problems with Rogers being rated in the top 12? He is below the level of Contador and Evans, but I would still rate him above Leipheimer, Cunego and Vande Velde. If they're off the junk, then all the riders would probably have at least one bad day in the mountains. The TdF this year is also not that severe with most mountain stages other than Ventoux not being mountain-top finishes, so it may favour riders who are not the best in the mountains. I also really hope that Andy turns in a good performance. He is an exciting prospect.

 

[BroDeal]

Do you have problems with Rogers being rated in the top 12? He is below the level of Contador and Evans, but I would still rate him above Leipheimer, Cunego and Vande Velde. If they're off the junk, then all the riders would probably have at least one bad day in the mountains. The TdF this year is also not that severe with most mountain stages other than Ventoux not being mountain-top finishes, so it may favour riders who are not the best in the mountains. I also really hope that Andy turns in a good performance. He is an exciting prospect.

I don't have a problem with Rogers in the top 12. Although I would rate Leecheimer above him and Vande Velde too if he can turn in a performance near what he did last year. Cunego can no longer be considered a legit GT contender.

As you say, the TdF's course this year looks like Rogers could do better than he would on a more normal course, but another knock against Rogers is that he does not seem to perform as well during GT time trials as he does in standalone time trial races. He did manage to hold on to 8th place in the Giro. Maybe this year he will finally perform up to the expectations some people have for him.

 

[climas]

Kreuziger and Nibali would be a better choice as ladder boys instead of Cunego and Vande Velde in my opinion...

 

[ElChingon]

Does anyone know what the sub number means? The number in (#)'s.

 

[elapid]

Does anyone know what the sub number means? The number in (#)'s.

Not sure, but possibly position in last year's ladder? Doesn't make much sense though because Contador is rated #1 and he obviously wasn't racing last year.

 

[jaylew]

Does anyone know what the sub number means? The number in (#)'s.

Previous ranking. They did a similar article a few months ago.

 

[slcbiker]

Rogers doesn't climb well enough to podium in a GT. Top ten probably, but not top three.
Leipheimer's certainly over-raced, but normally I'd put him above Rogers, as he's a better climber and equal at least equal TT.

Rogers TT world titles were largely won in years when the best TT riders skipped the worlds.

 

[jaylew]

I also can't believe how people are dissing Armstrong's return performances. He is starting at near neo-pro level and finished 12th in a tough Giro after a collarbone fracture a month earlier. This would be hailed as miraculous by a new rider. He really is a machine and he may just find the top level again.

Honestly, you're probably right. After all, he beat guys like Cunego and Simoni who supposedly built their season around it and had proper build-ups. But he has a couple of things working against him in that regard. Firstly, he is such a polarizing figure. Many people have a strong dislike for the guy (I admit it, I've never liked him) and it makes it really hard for most to give him credit for anything. It's easier (and more fun) to tear him apart for something.

Secondly, he set the bar really high. When you win 7 straight Tours, 12th at the Giro just seems like a failure to some. Happens all the time. Tiger takes 9 months off for knee surgery, comes back and in his 1st 6 stroke play events, finishes in the top 10 every time and wins once and everyone's like "What's wrong with Tiger?" MJ came back after 3 years off and switching sports and averaged 23 and 20 points a game in two seasons with the Wizards and people just compared him to Bulls-era Jordan.

I don't know if I agree with you about him finding the top level again, though. I think at some point age has to catch up with you and you've got other riders like Contador just coming into their prime. Going in, I thought 10-12 was a best case scenario for him but I didn't really believe it would happen. Not after spending a few years mostly off the bike chasing skirts.

 

[ElChingon]

Previous ranking. They did a similar article a few months ago.

You'd think they would of referenced it somehow, CN dropped the ball, it could of even listed why they had them higher or lower. Guess its too much to ask them to follow through on their own stories.

 

[phillop]

On their logic, why is pellozoti not featured?

 

[Epicycle]

The Tour ladder only needs two rungs.

1. Contador
2. Andy Schleck

 

[LugHugger]

The Tour ladder only needs two rungs.

1. Contador
2. Andy Schleck

I would argue 3 with Sastre making up the numbers

 

[knorensnor]

Contador and A.Schleck are indeed my favorites for the Tour.
I don't believe Sastre is capable of beating these 2 machines in the mountains. And yes, Kreuziger could be a revelation, but what happened to Zubeldia and Kloden?? They have shown in the past that they are capable of riding top 5...I know that they have to ride for Contador and Armstrong, but you never now how the Tour may develop...I believe they certainly have more chance than Cunego or Rogers...As a Belgian, I hope to see Van den Broeck and Devolder in top 10, although it will be tough.

 

[dsut4392]

Mick Rogers

Contador and A.Schleck are indeed my favorites for the Tour.
I don't believe Sastre is capable of beating these 2 machines in the mountains. And yes, Kreuziger could be a revelation, but what happened to Zubeldia and Kloden?? They have shown in the past that they are capable of riding top 5...I know that they have to ride for Contador and Armstrong, but you never now how the Tour may develop...I believe they certainly have more chance than Cunego or Rogers...As a Belgian, I hope to see Van den Broeck and Devolder in top 10, although it will be tough.

Rogers completely sacrificed his '06 tour in support of Klöden and still came 9th (or 10th if you count Landis). And as has already been said, he was virtual GC leader and looking very good in '07 before he crashed out. For those who doubt his climbing, from my recollections of '07 he seemed to be the only one who could stand a chance against Contador and Rasmussen. Who knows if he has the ability to come back post injury and sickness, but I think he's right to make the list of contenders.
As an Aussie I want to like him, but can't quite shake off the suspicions that haunt anyone associated with T-Mobile...

 

[LugHugger]

Contador and A.Schleck are indeed my favorites for the Tour.
I don't believe Sastre is capable of beating these 2 machines in the mountains. And yes, Kreuziger could be a revelation, but what happened to Zubeldia and Kloden?? They have shown in the past that they are capable of riding top 5...I know that they have to ride for Contador and Armstrong, but you never now how the Tour may develop...I believe they certainly have more chance than Cunego or Rogers...As a Belgian, I hope to see Van den Broeck and Devolder in top 10, although it will be tough.

yep, i can't see past Contador for taking the top step of the podium in Paris. My reason for including Sastre is that I believe that he and the Schlecklet will do battle for second place to be decided on the differential between their TT results (Sastre to win that battle) and their HC mountain times (tougher to call although like you I'm leaning more towards Schleck this year).

 

[jmnikricket]

You'd think they would of referenced it somehow, CN dropped the ball, it could of even listed why they had them higher or lower. Guess its too much to ask them to follow through on their own stories.

Seriously? Did you read the article or just look at the numbers? Two obvious examples showing why their ladder position changed:

#2 Sastre (11) : "From almost dead-last in last month's ladder to second place this month, it's been a huge turnaround for the 2008 Tour champ."

#6 A Schleck (12) : "The Cyclingnews diarist makes a huge jump in our ladder this month thanks to his win in Liege."

Some you have to dig a little deeper:

# 9 Cunego (3) : "the Italian looks like a shadow of his former self - a mediocre stage racer rider who can't climb, recover or even claim to be the leader of his own Lampre team." referring to his recent Giro performance

Not only that, but they are constantly comparing performances that last months ladder was based on to results since then (notably the Giro in most cases). And some riders they admit that their true form hasn't been shown yet, which makes it hard to put an exact ranking on right now.

It was an excellent followup article to the first list, even if you don't agree with the rankings/who's on it. Sorry they didn't want to make a broken record for you, "this rider is higher/lower because... this rider is higher/lower because..."

 

[elapid]

You don't have to say:

"this rider is higher/lower because... this rider is higher/lower because..."

All CN needed to do was state that the numbers in brackets were the rider's ranking in a previous ladder published on ... There is no reference and they did drop the ball a little by not providing an explanation as to what these meant.

 

[BroDeal]

On their logic, why is pellozoti not featured?

Pellizotti is one of those Italian riders who does well in the Giro but never, ever does well in the Tour.

 

[elapid]

Pellizotti is one of those Italian riders who does well in the Giro but never, ever does well in the Tour.

So is Cunego though, but he is ranked.

 

[lookkg386]

When do we expect to even see a French rider on the top 12 ladder????

 

[eric_vv]

Rogers completely sacrificed his '06 tour in support of Klöden and still came 9th (or 10th if you count Landis). And as has already been said, he was virtual GC leader and looking very good in '07 before he crashed out. For those who doubt his climbing, from my recollections of '07 he seemed to be the only one who could stand a chance against Contador and Rasmussen. Who knows if he has the ability to come back post injury and sickness, but I think he's right to make the list of contenders.
As an Aussie I want to like him, but can't quite shake off the suspicions that haunt anyone associated with T-Mobile...

It always surprises me when people say that Rogers showed he's a GT threat in 2007. I remember him being already dropped by Rasmussen (with 1 or 2 mountains still to go) before he crashed. The only reason he was in the break was because the favourites didn't consider him a threat, they might have been wrong (they were about Rasmussen), but the fact he was already dropped makes me think they were right.

You also have to consider it was the first hard mountain stage and he never had to go head to head against the other GC riders, there's no way to tell if he could have challenged any of them. Going in a break hardly proves you're a threat, it usually points to the opposite (not that I don’t want to see attacking riding, but GC riders usually only consider it when they have already lost). If you ask me Rogers would probably have been caught and left behind on the final climb, Rasmussen wasn’t miles ahead at the finish and Rogers was already dropped early in the stage.

Even after the stage Rasmussen wasn’t expected to challenge for the overall (at least not in the Dutch and Belgian press) and I don’t get how Rogers became a challenger just because he was up the road early in a mountain stage. He hasn’t show anything before or since that makes me think he can win a GT.

Even if I’m mistaken and Rogers wasn’t dropped yet (always a possibility) the rest still stands.