Top 10 Rides of the Year

[cineteq]

I'm not denying it was a very good ride but "limited his losses" shouldn't be anywhere near a description of the ride of the year.

It's the ride of the year for me, because with that ride he won the most important race there is. As simple as that.

Andy's terrible ITT skills allowed for that to happen, namely getting that many minutes. You do the math.

 

[Ragerod]

It's the ride of the year for me, because with that ride he won the most important race there is. As simple as that.

Andy's terrible ITT skills allowed for that to happen, namely getting that many minutes. You do the math.

Fair enough. I think Evans rode a great tour, didn't have a bad day and was very good on several occasions without being exceptional on a day. I'd say his performances on the Galibier and the ITT were both very good whilst Andy was exceptional on the Galibier and then did a terrible ITT.

 

[The Hitch]

It's the ride of the year for me, because with that ride he won the most important race there is. As simple as that.

So what was your ride of the year in 2010?

 

[cineteq]

So what was your ride of the year in 2010?

Contador's ride on TdF's Stage 17 2010, Col du Tourmalet. He stayed glued to Schleck and that was it!

 

[The Hitch]

So would I be "undermining" Contador if I said Cancellaras ride in Paris Roubaix was greatly superior?

 

[jordan5000]

I loved Gilbert's attack on stage 1 (I think) of the tour when he just blew past everybody (including Spartacus) like they were standing still to take the victory. Andy's performance was very good as well as Evan's TT to win the tour.

 

[The Hitch]

Other than FW, imo GIlberts other best performance was Quebec. He was tired, attacked once, sat up, then attack again and still left them all and held off Gesink in an epic battle.

 

[cineteq]

Other than FW, imo GIlberts other best performance was Quebec. He was tired, attacked once, sat up, then attack again and still left them all and held off Gesink in an epic battle.

Agree, easily one of his top rides this year. It seemed like a close mano-a-mano when in fact he toyed with Gesink, he was in total control.

 

[c&cfan]

Other than FW, imo GIlberts other best performance was Quebec. He was tired, attacked once, sat up, then attack again and still left them all and held off Gesink in an epic battle.

maybe i don't know how to appreciate this sport, since i haven't seen nothing better than cancellara at E3, RVV and roubaix, contador´s attack with 100km to go, contador at the giro and andy's attack. nothing was more powerful than these rides.

 

[Tuarts]

If you payed attention to my posts you would see that i have been one of the bigger Cadel fans on here, especially during his dark days last year when much of the forum was against him.

I have listed the reasons why I like Cadel, many times on here, besides, unlike sadly a lot of the forum , I do not hate any riders, as they are a part of my sport

Its his fans, or 1 or 2 of them getting a bit excited about his abilities, that I respond to, and I am mature enough to separate a cyclist from fans he has never met.

And I dont really see how arguing that Cadel is worse than Contador, or that Andy's attack was immensely superior, is talking him down. Would I be talking down Tyler Farrar if I said that Cavendish was a better sprinter?

Im not talking down Evans, Im bigging up Schleck.

Yes hes hated on here and Im not his biggest fan either but I do feel a bit sorry for him to see his attack so extremely underapreciated.

Anyone who suggests that Evans attacking from 15k out is superior to Schleck attacking from 65k out, and going all on his own as several teams tried to bring him back, and holding out all the way, is really taking the **** out of Andy Schleck.

Like, totally dismissing him.

And we both know that if the rolls were reversed and Cadel had done the super attack from 65k out, and Schleck had gone from 15km you all would still vote for Cadel.

Think about it seriously. If Cadel had attacked from 65km out, faced several teams on a flat, and managed to hold on to win a stage by 2 minutes, would you not argue that it was the most remarkable sporting feat of all time and that Andy Schlecks attack to limit his time, 15km out cant even compare?

Me, i would stick with the 65k attack. Cadel is a more deserving winner of the overall race than Schleck, but when it comes to greater ride on the day, Andy Schleck 65km suicide attack beats Cadels 15k one more convincingly than Cancellara at E3 Prijs.

So if you could please, sir, focus on the actual question at hand - the reasons why one attack might be superior than another (cough because I like Cadel more cough) rather than to try to paint me as biased, which doesnt mean much anyway, because even if i happened to be a Cadels biggest hater, pointing that out would not take away one once of credibility from the arguments i make.

It's always nice to hear that! That said, I think you're wrong. In the context of the whole tour, Cadel taking it upon himself to claw back Andy and gaining the time he did, was more effective than Andy's attack and therefore more impressive.

 

[Tigerion]

Surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet but Pierre Rolland on Alpe-d’Huez was a highlight for me

A young rider without a major win to his name, riding on a pro conti team taking on and then beating two of the greats. Kept his head and played the tactical game better than one his age could be expected.


And this

 

[RedheadDane]

Not going to post my own list, couldn't pick anyway. So I'll just multi-quote and comment on yours.

7. Jonny Hoogerland, TdF Stage 9, Issoire – Saint-Flour
After getting knocked off your bike by a ton of wayward metal, spiralling through barbed wire and having your legs, literally, ripped to shreds, most of us would go crying to our mum and not got back on a bike again for 2 months. Jonny was picking up the polka dot jersey within 2 hours.

8. Philippe Gilbert, La Fleche Wallonne.
Phil, it’s the Mur de Huy. At least make it look like you’re working for your win a little bit next time please.

10. Thor Hushovd, TdF Stage 12, Pau – Lourdes
An irresistible force, Thor imposed his personality, will and sheer presence on the rest. They didn’t stand a chance – he would not be denied.

7. Yeah. Doing what he (Johnny) did is simply Not normal!

8. What I think all the time! "Seriously, man. Can't you at least pretend it's hard?"

10. Totally epic. Especially his rather disbelieving expression.

1) Contador's attack 100km from the finish line on the Alpe d'Huez stage. I'm sorry but this was just something no one could predict. He didn't have a teammate on the front or anything just himself to handle it. You don't attack 100km out just for fun

You do if you're Alberto Contador...

Vasili Kiriyenka - His win on Sestriere after going solo away from the competition on the Finestere not long after his friend died, that was special.

Yeah. Such a beautiful win.

Surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet but Pierre Rolland on Alpe-d’Huez was a highlight for me

A young rider without a major win to his name, riding on a pro conti team taking on and then beating two of the greats. Kept his head and played the tactical game better than one his age could be expected.


And this

Love that picture!

And Rolland, what a great kid! Who's two years older than me buuuut... anyway!

---

Okay, I do have 1 moment.

TdF stage 16. The two, extremely succesful, Norwegians in the Tour (both with a stage-win) sprinting out for the win, with the third rider in the group, a team-mate to the eventual winner, just happening to be a "pseudo-Norwegian."

Which of course leads us to stage 17: EBH going for the win simply from being angry at missing out the day before...

Erh... guys... How come no one mentioned Summie? That win was amazing!

 

[Fus087]

I like the expression on Rojas' face.
He looks like "yeah, he deserved it".

 

[The Hitch]

Surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet but Pierre Rolland on Alpe-d’Huez was a highlight for me

He wheelsucked Samu, was even willing to give up on the whole thing when Samu stopped temporarily to ask him to pull. So Samu said, **** it began to pull again to get a chance at the stage and as soon a she saw Contador Rolland let fly with 1.5km to go.

 

[just some guy]

He wheelsucked Samu, was even willing to give up on the whole thing when Samu stopped temporarily to ask him to pull. So Samu said, **** it began to pull again to get a chance at the stage and as soon a she saw Contador Rolland let fly with 1.5km to go.

Road smart and won.

If it was the other way around you probably be saying Rolland is still young a lot to learn and will grow from the experience

 

[movingtarget]

If you payed attention to my posts you would see that i have been one of the bigger Cadel fans on here, especially during his dark days last year when much of the forum was against him.

I have listed the reasons why I like Cadel, many times on here, besides, unlike sadly a lot of the forum , I do not hate any riders, as they are a part of my sport

Its his fans, or 1 or 2 of them getting a bit excited about his abilities, that I respond to, and I am mature enough to separate a cyclist from fans he has never met.

And I dont really see how arguing that Cadel is worse than Contador, or that Andy's attack was immensely superior, is talking him down. Would I be talking down Tyler Farrar if I said that Cavendish was a better sprinter?

Im not talking down Evans, Im bigging up Schleck.

Yes hes hated on here and Im not his biggest fan either but I do feel a bit sorry for him to see his attack so extremely underapreciated.

Anyone who suggests that Evans attacking from 15k out is superior to Schleck attacking from 65k out, and going all on his own as several teams tried to bring him back, and holding out all the way, is really taking the **** out of Andy Schleck.

Like, totally dismissing him.

And we both know that if the rolls were reversed and Cadel had done the super attack from 65k out, and Schleck had gone from 15km you all would still vote for Cadel.

Think about it seriously. If Cadel had attacked from 65km out, faced several teams on a flat, and managed to hold on to win a stage by 2 minutes, would you not argue that it was the most remarkable sporting feat of all time and that Andy Schlecks attack to limit his time, 15km out cant even compare?

Me, i would stick with the 65k attack. Cadel is a more deserving winner of the overall race than Schleck, but when it comes to greater ride on the day, Andy Schleck 65km suicide attack beats Cadels 15k one more convincingly than Cancellara at E3 Prijs.

So if you could please, sir, focus on the actual question at hand - the reasons why one attack might be superior than another (cough because I like Cadel more cough) rather than to try to paint me as biased, which doesnt mean much anyway, because even if i happened to be a Cadels biggest hater, pointing that out would not take away one once of credibility from the arguments i make.

Sure it took guts to do what Schleck did but just because it's a suicide attack does not make it more admirable. Tactically, Evans was the winner on the stage and he did not attack, he defended. He minimised his losses and realised that if he reacted earlier there was less chance of success. The combination of a tiring Schleck and Evans waiting for the final climb was the right decision for Evans who had no one willing to work with him not that they had to. In the context of the race Evans ride was the better one tactically. In my eyes Schleck had already lost the race by not gaining more time before the Galibier and losing time at Gap. That was the reason I voted for Evan's ride. I don't hate Schleck, I just think he makes mistakes that others don't make.

 

[Havetts]

Sure it took guts to do what Schleck did but just because it's a suicide attack does not make it more admirable. Tactically, Evans was the winner on the stage and he did not attack, he defended. He minimised his losses and realised that if he reacted earlier there was less chance of success. The combination of a tiring Schleck and Evans waiting for the final climb was the right decision for Evans who had no one willing to work with him not that they had to. In the context of the race Evans ride was the better one tactically. In my eyes Schleck had already lost the race by not gaining more time before the Galibier and losing time at Gap. That was the reason I voted for Evan's ride. I don't hate Schleck, I just think he makes mistakes that others don't make.

Yet when the roles were played by Pantani and Ullrich, Pantani was the hero, did everything right and was a send from god. Yet when its the same situation with Schleck and Evans in the leadroles, the Evans fanboys or either Schleck haters can't admit it it was the same situation yet Evans didnt crack but still lost time. Who gives a **** if he was the tactical winner, the hero of the stage was Schleck, yet people never want to acknowledge because they either fanboy for Evans or have a huge hatred for Schleck for some reason....

 

[The Hitch]

He minimised his losses and realised that if he reacted earlier there was less chance of success. The combination of a tiring Schleck and Evans waiting for the final climb was the right decision for Evans who had no one willing to work with him not that they had to. In the context of the race Evans ride was the better one tactically. In my eyes Schleck had already lost the race by not gaining more time before the Galibier and losing time at Gap. That was the reason I voted for Evan's ride. I don't hate Schleck, I just think he makes mistakes that others don't make.

No, waiting for the final climb was not the right decision. Or if it was then the ride was not powerful enough. Either way, Evans was in the drivers seat from the moment Andy got out of his bike. He had a team with him, on the flats, was in the peloton, and could start fresher against a tired Andy at any time he wanted.

That Schleck managed to get 2 minutes is nothing short of a miracle.

I should add that Evans was in a worse position, and Andy a better one, after the Galibier stage than they had been 5 hours earlier.

Evans was the winner in Paris, but on the top of the Galibier, after their rides, it was Andy who was in a better position.

 

[Angliru]

It's always nice to hear that! That said, I think you're wrong. In the context of the whole tour,
Cadel taking it upon himself to claw back Andy and gaining the time he did, was more effective than Andy's attack and
therefore more impressive.

I'm likely the last person anyone would expect to be defending Andy Schleck but his long distance attack to eventually
take the win on the Galibier was risky and daring and most importantly, absolutely necessary for him. It put him in a
position for a podium spot that had slipped away with the time he lost on a previous stages rainy descent. It didn't win
him the Tour but it did better his potentially lost chances of a podium finish. In this era of conservative-limit one's
losses-wait till the final climb for action-type of racing, his effort harkened back to an era when some contenders would
throw caution to the wind and attack much earlier than the final climb to the finish.

 

[cineteq]

Sure it took guts to do what Schleck did but just because it's a suicide attack does not make it more admirable. Tactically, Evans was the winner on the stage and he did not attack, he defended. He minimised his losses and realised that if he reacted earlier there was less chance of success. The combination of a tiring Schleck and Evans waiting for the final climb was the right decision for Evans who had no one willing to work with him not that they had to. In the context of the race Evans ride was the better one tactically. In my eyes Schleck had already lost the race by not gaining more time before the Galibier and losing time at Gap. That was the reason I voted for Evan's ride. I don't hate Schleck, I just think he makes mistakes that others don't make.

This could have been the ride of the year had Andy Schleck put more than 4:30 minutes on Evans that day. He did what he needed to do, attack!. The only question was: is it too soon? At one point he was clear by 4 minutes, but in the end he was denied.

 

[Tank Engine]

For me, the order is more or less chronological,

1. de Gendt in Paris-Nice.

2. Scarponi in MSR. Bridging to the front group.

3. (Not one ride) Cancellara E3/Flanders. Awesome in the first race. Bit off more than he could chew in the second.

4. (Again not one ride, but Phil had to be there and there's too many to choose from) Phil in the Ardennes.

5. Bertie on Etna.

6. Kiriyienka -Sestriere

7. Sagan in Tour de Suisse

8. Thor in Pau

9. Schleckette on the Galibier stage (honourable mention to Cuddles)

10. Moncoutie on Manzenada (bit of a bias here, but he's such a stylish climber)

Personal favourites: Danny boy's stage win in the Tour of Poland and the Cobo/Froome duel on Pena Cabarga.

 

[Tank Engine]

This could have been the ride of the year had Andy Schleck put more than 4:30 minutes on Evans that day. He did what he needed to do, attack!. The only question was: is it too soon? At one point he was clear by 4 minutes, but in the end he was denied.

He attacked a few km from the top of penultimate climb. He could not have got away later in the stage. Ergo, it was at the right point.

 

[woodenswan]

2. Scarponi in MSR. Bridging to the front group.

totally forgot about that. that was a great great effort

 

[The Hitch]

Yet when the roles were played by Pantani and Ullrich, Pantani was the hero, did everything right and was a send from god. Yet when its the same situation with Schleck and Evans in the leadroles, the Evans fanboys or either Schleck haters can't admit it it was the same situation yet Evans didnt crack but still lost time. Who gives a **** if he was the tactical winner, the hero of the stage was Schleck, yet people never want to acknowledge because they either fanboy for Evans or have a huge hatred for Schleck for some reason....

So said the Gospel.

Amen.

Havetts 3:16.

 

[Dancing On The Pedals]

Yet when the roles were played by Pantani and Ullrich, Pantani was the hero, did everything right and was a send from god. Yet when its the same situation with Schleck and Evans in the leadroles, the Evans fanboys or either Schleck haters can't admit it it was the same situation yet Evans didnt crack but still lost time. Who gives a **** if he was the tactical winner, the hero of the stage was Schleck, yet people never want to acknowledge because they either fanboy for Evans or have a huge hatred for Schleck for some reason....

The main difference between Schleck/Evans and Pantani/Ullrich is that whereas Ullrich lost 9 minutes having completely cracked, Evans limited his losses to just over 2 minutes with a gutsy, determined, and courageous ride having recognised that he wasn't going to get any help from anyone else. Schleck's ride was similarly a fantastic and gutsy ride, an audacious attempt to try and win the Tour, and certainly his is the ride that captures the imagination the most. However, having got from work and turning on the TV as they approached Galibier (a friend having texted me what was going on) watching Evans tow the group all the way up, never once looking around for help was very impressive. Both are very deserving of inclusion in the 'top rides of the year' imho.