• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Tour de France 2019

Page 21 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re:

SafeBet said:
- Geraint Thomas: needed everything to be absolutely perfect to repeat, but his prep wasn't ideal and I have doubts over his shape. I don't see him on the podium.
I see it the other way around. He will be up there somewhere even if he's not on last year's stratospheric level. Hard to get rid of when he doesn't have to work for the team. People seem to forget how good he is.

I'm not completely sold on Bernal, but if the Tour turns into an attritional grind without big raids to shake things up, he could prove to be the strongest and win it by default. I don't see an exciting way in which he wins the Tour.
 
Re: Re:

Squire said:
I'm not completely sold on Bernal, but if the Tour turns into an attritional grind without big raids to shake things up, he could prove to be the strongest and win it by default. I don't see an exciting way in which he wins the Tour.
I'm somewhat expecting Bernal to be as strong as most are expecting him to be, but i agree that on the other hand, he's still got everything to prove as a GT contender over 3 weeks. He's never been in that position before, so it's still an unknown.

Or is he really going to dom for Thomas?
 
Re: Re:

Squire said:
SafeBet said:
- Geraint Thomas: needed everything to be absolutely perfect to repeat, but his prep wasn't ideal and I have doubts over his shape. I don't see him on the podium.
I see it the other way around. He will be up there somewhere even if he's not on last year's stratospheric level. Hard to get rid of when he doesn't have to work for the team. People seem to forget how good he is.

I'm not completely sold on Bernal, but if the Tour turns into an attritional grind without big raids to shake things up, he could prove to be the strongest and win it by default. I don't see an exciting way in which he wins the Tour.
I could see Bernal having the ability to go from far out on the Iseran to make up a 2 minute gap on Fuglsang/Pinot/Kruiswijk/Yates/whoever.

The hard part there is seeing where he and/or Thomas loses 2 minutes over the first 18 stages to anyone in the first place.

We saw in the Giro last year that Skyneos are willing to attack when they need to, they’ve just tended to not need to over the years.
 
Re: Re:

Leinster said:
Squire said:
SafeBet said:
- Geraint Thomas: needed everything to be absolutely perfect to repeat, but his prep wasn't ideal and I have doubts over his shape. I don't see him on the podium.
I see it the other way around. He will be up there somewhere even if he's not on last year's stratospheric level. Hard to get rid of when he doesn't have to work for the team. People seem to forget how good he is.

I'm not completely sold on Bernal, but if the Tour turns into an attritional grind without big raids to shake things up, he could prove to be the strongest and win it by default. I don't see an exciting way in which he wins the Tour.
I could see Bernal having the ability to go from far out on the Iseran to make up a 2 minute gap on Fuglsang/Pinot/Kruiswijk/Yates/whoever.

The hard part there is seeing where he and/or Thomas loses 2 minutes over the first 18 stages to anyone in the first place.

We saw in the Giro last year that Skyneos are willing to attack when they need to, they’ve just tended to not need to over the years.
Where is anyone gonna lose 2 minutes, apart from the TTT, the ITT and the Tourmalet?

And even on the Tourmalet, I can see Ineos doing a snail pace with Bernal's counter being the scare tactic
 
Re:

Poursuivant said:
Fuglsang will win this Tour.
I just don't get this. No evidence other than Dauphine. That isn't a good guide. At 34 riders usually give strong clues of their Grand Tour capabilities well before.

By comparison Cadel Evans was also 34 when he won the Tour. But by then Evans had two MTB world cups, was in pink at the 2002 Giro until the final mountain, two previous Tour podiums, a worlds victory on a climbers course, a Vuelta podium, 5th in the 2010 Giro and showed promise on the road since 1999.

But what has Fuglsang done that suggests he can turn his own history on its head in the biggest and hardest fought of the Grand Tours? Best grand tour result was 7th in 2013 TdF. Or are we now in the age of the late bloomers? Like Geraint?
 
Re: Re:

Cookster15 said:
Poursuivant said:
Fuglsang will win this Tour.
I just don't get this. No evidence other than Dauphine. That isn't a good guide. At 34 riders usually give strong clues of their Grand Tour capabilities well before.

By comparison Cadel Evans was also 34 when he won the Tour. But by then Evans had two MTB world cups, was in pink at the 2002 Giro until the final mountain, two previous Tour podiums, a worlds victory on a climbers course, a Vuelta podium, 5th in the 2010 Giro and showed promise on the road since 1999.

But what has Fuglsang done that suggests he can turn his own history on its head in the biggest and hardest fought of the Grand Tours? Best grand tour result was 7th in 2013 TdF. Or are we now in the age of the late bloomers? Like Geraint?
Plenty of evidence throughout the entire season.

Bernal has never been in the top 10 of a Grand Tour. Roglic and Thomas hadn't been so before the Tour last year, nor Mas before the Vuelta. That didn't prevent them from contesting the overall wins.

It's clearly not his Grand Tour pedigree on which we're basing the assumption that he can win (or at least finish on the podium) but the fact that he has been a level above everyone else than Bernal this year even if he is 34 now.

So, yeah, maybe he's a late bloomer, I wouldn't know. Something has definitely happened with him before this season.
 
I don't put much faith in week long stage races as a strong guide for Tour winners. Ask Richie Porte.

Bernal is 22 not relevant. Natural progression.
Mas was just 23 before the Vuelta, not relevant.
Roglic relatively new to the sport and still only 29, not relevant.
You have a point on Thomas. But now lighting strikes twice in two years? I don't think so. Even Thomas was 2 years younger than Fuglsang is now.

Fuglsang has been pro since 2006 - 13 years ago. Best GT result 7th in 2013 TdF.

Top 5 would be a good result for Fuglsang. Best in his career. But a podium is doubtful. All the training and periodisation of the grand tour contenders and teams is geared to the big races these days. Sure the sponsors want wins at Dauphine but the TdF is the big fish. That is when everyone is 100%. Not week long races like Dauphine.
 
Bernal will be part of the train which will ride the appropriate tempo to drag Thomas up those interminable steady climbs which are all over this Tour. If nobody tries something creative in the PdBF stage, if he isn't total crap and he doesn't fall off his bike, the same Thomas will have about 2 minutes over everybody except his teammates by the time they reach Tourmalet. Nothing happens there and then defend until Paris. Uran to wheelsuck to the podium with Bernal third out of inertia protecting Thomas.
 
Re:

Cookster15 said:
I don't put much faith in week long stage races as a strong guide for Tour winners. Ask Richie Porte.

Bernal is 22 not relevant. Natural progression.
Mas was just 23 before the Vuelta, not relevant.
Roglic relatively new to the sport and still only 29, not relevant.
You have a point on Thomas. But now lighting strikes twice in two years? I don't think so. Even Thomas was 2 years younger than Fuglsang is now.

Fuglsang has been pro since 2006 - 13 years ago. Best GT result 7th in 2013 TdF.

Top 5 would be a good result for Fuglsang. Best in his career. But a podium is doubtful. All the training and periodisation of the grand tour contenders and teams is geared to the big races these days. Sure the sponsors want wins at Dauphine but the TdF is the big fish. That is when everyone is 100%. Not week long races like Dauphine.
Let me ask you a question:

How often do we really see people being levels below the best riders throughout the season to then suddenly winning Tours de France?

That's not often. Nibali and the 2017 Froome is the only rider to really have done something like that in this decade. Everybody else had been firing on all cylinders throughout the season.

I don't give much for that periodisation argument. I know sports scientists think it's all the rave, but statistically speaking, I don't see much evidence pointing to Tour winners periodising their early seasons into invisibility.

In 2018, Thomas won the Dauphiné and would have won both Tirreno and Algarve were it not for a chain loss and a weird tactical situation.

In 2017, Froome got 4th in the Dauphiné which was his best result so far this season but he had the Vuelta in mind.

In 2016, Froome won the Dauphiné and the Herald Sun Tour (LOL) but might also have contested the Romandie win if he didn't puncture at a fatal time on the first mountain stage (he did win a stage from a break and got close on the TT later in the race).

In 2015, Froome won the Dauphiné and the Ruta del Sol (over Contador) and was third in Romandie.

In 2014, Nibali didn't do anything until becoming Italian champion so he doesn't really do my point any favours.

In 2013, Froome won the Dauphiné, Romandie, Critérium International and the Tour of Oman, and he was only beaten in Tirreno by Nibali on the legendary Porto Sant'Elpidio stage where Sagan somehow outclimbed him together with Nibali and Purito.

In 2012, Wiggins won the Dauphiné, Romandie and Paris-Nice and he was third in Algarve.

In 2011, Evans won Romandie and Tirreno and was second in the Dauphiné.

In 2010, Contador won Algarve, Paris-Nice and Castilla y León and was second in the Dauphiné.

In 2009, Contador won Algarve and País Vasco, hungerflatted himself out of winning Paris-Nice and was third in the Dauphiné.

So in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013, the dominant stage racer of the spring also won the Tour, while arguably one of the most dominating spring riders won in 2015, 2016 and 2018.

Tour-winning form rarely comes out of nowhere.
 
It’s not just that Fuglsang is the form rider. It’s also that there’s a lack of proven Grand Tour opposition on the start line. I think Nibali is the only multi GT winner in the field, and he’s getting older and coming off a Giro. In Froome’s absence, (and Dumoulin, and Roglic) there’s a gap at the top of the favorites list. Bernal and Thomas are up there 90% based on who they’re riding for, and nobody else has such a strong pedigree that you can say for sure they’ll beat Fuglsang.

That full top 10 from when Fuglsang made the list in 2013;

1 Chris Froome (UK) A yellow jersey. Team Sky 83h 56' 40"
2 Nairo Quintana (COL) Movistar Team + 4' 20"
3 Joaquim Rodríguez (ESP) Team Katusha + 5' 04"
4 Alberto Contador (ESP) Saxo–Tinkoff + 6' 27"
5 Roman Kreuziger (CZE) Saxo–Tinkoff + 7' 27"
6 Bauke Mollema (NED) Belkin Pro Cycling + 11' 42"
7 Jakob Fuglsang (DEN) Astana + 12' 17"
8 Alejandro Valverde (ESP) Movistar Team + 15' 26"
9 Daniel Navarro (ESP) Cofidis + 15' 52"
10 Andrew Talansky (USA) Garmin–Sharp + 17' 39"
 
Re: Re:

tobydawq said:
Cookster15 said:
I don't put much faith in week long stage races as a strong guide for Tour winners. Ask Richie Porte.

Bernal is 22 not relevant. Natural progression.
Mas was just 23 before the Vuelta, not relevant.
Roglic relatively new to the sport and still only 29, not relevant.
You have a point on Thomas. But now lighting strikes twice in two years? I don't think so. Even Thomas was 2 years younger than Fuglsang is now.

Fuglsang has been pro since 2006 - 13 years ago. Best GT result 7th in 2013 TdF.

Top 5 would be a good result for Fuglsang. Best in his career. But a podium is doubtful. All the training and periodisation of the grand tour contenders and teams is geared to the big races these days. Sure the sponsors want wins at Dauphine but the TdF is the big fish. That is when everyone is 100%. Not week long races like Dauphine.
Let me ask you a question:

How often do we really see people being levels below the best riders throughout the season to then suddenly winning Tours de France?

That's not often. Nibali and the 2017 Froome is the only rider to really have done something like that in this decade. Everybody else had been firing on all cylinders throughout the season.

I don't give much for that periodisation argument. I know sports scientists think it's all the rave, but statistically speaking, I don't see much evidence pointing to Tour winners periodising their early seasons into invisibility.

In 2018, Thomas won the Dauphiné and would have won both Tirreno and Algarve were it not for a chain loss and a weird tactical situation.

In 2017, Froome got 4th in the Dauphiné which was his best result so far this season but he had the Vuelta in mind.

In 2016, Froome won the Dauphiné and the Herald Sun Tour (LOL) but might also have contested the Romandie win if he didn't puncture at a fatal time on the first mountain stage (he did win a stage from a break and got close on the TT later in the race).

In 2015, Froome won the Dauphiné and the Ruta del Sol (over Contador) and was third in Romandie.

In 2014, Nibali didn't do anything until becoming Italian champion so he doesn't really do my point any favours.

In 2013, Froome won the Dauphiné, Romandie, Critérium International and the Tour of Oman, and he was only beaten in Tirreno by Nibali on the legendary Porto Sant'Elpidio stage where Sagan somehow outclimbed him together with Nibali and Purito.

In 2012, Wiggins won the Dauphiné, Romandie and Paris-Nice and he was third in Algarve.

In 2011, Evans won Romandie and Tirreno and was second in the Dauphiné.

In 2010, Contador won Algarve, Paris-Nice and Castilla y León and was second in the Dauphiné.

In 2009, Contador won Algarve and País Vasco, hungerflatted himself out of winning Paris-Nice and was third in the Dauphiné.

So in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013, the dominant stage racer of the spring also won the Tour, while arguably one of the most dominating spring riders won in 2015, 2016 and 2018.

Tour-winning form rarely comes out of nowhere.
In 2010., Andy Schleck 82. at Tirreno, 18. in Amstel, 8. at FW, 5. at LBL, 21. in California, 14. in Suisse.
But that's the last year of the previous decade, so I guess it doesn't count.
 
How often do we really see people being levels below the best riders throughout the season to then suddenly winning Tours de France?
Not often but you ask the wrong question. The right question is how often do we really see people being levels below the best riders throughout their career then suddenly winning Tours de France in their twilight years? Answer: Never in my memory. Even Thomas was two years younger last year. I just don't put so much faith on Dauphine and other minor season races I've explained why. Had Fuglsang shown GT podium ability in previous years I would think differently. But you can take my word if I am proven wrong I will be the first to come here and congratulate him. :)
 
Re: Re:

sir fly said:
tobydawq said:
Cookster15 said:
I don't put much faith in week long stage races as a strong guide for Tour winners. Ask Richie Porte.

Bernal is 22 not relevant. Natural progression.
Mas was just 23 before the Vuelta, not relevant.
Roglic relatively new to the sport and still only 29, not relevant.
You have a point on Thomas. But now lighting strikes twice in two years? I don't think so. Even Thomas was 2 years younger than Fuglsang is now.

Fuglsang has been pro since 2006 - 13 years ago. Best GT result 7th in 2013 TdF.

Top 5 would be a good result for Fuglsang. Best in his career. But a podium is doubtful. All the training and periodisation of the grand tour contenders and teams is geared to the big races these days. Sure the sponsors want wins at Dauphine but the TdF is the big fish. That is when everyone is 100%. Not week long races like Dauphine.
Let me ask you a question:

How often do we really see people being levels below the best riders throughout the season to then suddenly winning Tours de France?

That's not often. Nibali and the 2017 Froome is the only rider to really have done something like that in this decade. Everybody else had been firing on all cylinders throughout the season.

I don't give much for that periodisation argument. I know sports scientists think it's all the rave, but statistically speaking, I don't see much evidence pointing to Tour winners periodising their early seasons into invisibility.

In 2018, Thomas won the Dauphiné and would have won both Tirreno and Algarve were it not for a chain loss and a weird tactical situation.

In 2017, Froome got 4th in the Dauphiné which was his best result so far this season but he had the Vuelta in mind.

In 2016, Froome won the Dauphiné and the Herald Sun Tour (LOL) but might also have contested the Romandie win if he didn't puncture at a fatal time on the first mountain stage (he did win a stage from a break and got close on the TT later in the race).

In 2015, Froome won the Dauphiné and the Ruta del Sol (over Contador) and was third in Romandie.

In 2014, Nibali didn't do anything until becoming Italian champion so he doesn't really do my point any favours.

In 2013, Froome won the Dauphiné, Romandie, Critérium International and the Tour of Oman, and he was only beaten in Tirreno by Nibali on the legendary Porto Sant'Elpidio stage where Sagan somehow outclimbed him together with Nibali and Purito.

In 2012, Wiggins won the Dauphiné, Romandie and Paris-Nice and he was third in Algarve.

In 2011, Evans won Romandie and Tirreno and was second in the Dauphiné.

In 2010, Contador won Algarve, Paris-Nice and Castilla y León and was second in the Dauphiné.

In 2009, Contador won Algarve and País Vasco, hungerflatted himself out of winning Paris-Nice and was third in the Dauphiné.

So in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013, the dominant stage racer of the spring also won the Tour, while arguably one of the most dominating spring riders won in 2015, 2016 and 2018.

Tour-winning form rarely comes out of nowhere.
In 2010., Andy Schleck 82. at Tirreno, 18. in Amstel, 8. at FW, 5. at LBL, 21. in California, 14. in Suisse.
But that's the last year of the previous decade, so I guess it doesn't count.
Don't even get me started on Schleck and his pre-Tour performances...

PS: Nice to meet a fellow understander of the time of decade-shifts :D
 
Re:

Rollthedice said:
Bernal will be part of the train which will ride the appropriate tempo to drag Thomas up those interminable steady climbs which are all over this Tour. If nobody tries something creative in the PdBF stage, if he isn't total crap and he doesn't fall off his bike, the same Thomas will have about 2 minutes over everybody except his teammates by the time they reach Tourmalet. Nothing happens there and then defend until Paris. Uran to wheelsuck to the podium with Bernal third out of inertia protecting Thomas.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad:
 
Re: Re:

tobydawq said:
sir fly said:
tobydawq said:
Cookster15 said:
I don't put much faith in week long stage races as a strong guide for Tour winners. Ask Richie Porte.

Bernal is 22 not relevant. Natural progression.
Mas was just 23 before the Vuelta, not relevant.
Roglic relatively new to the sport and still only 29, not relevant.
You have a point on Thomas. But now lighting strikes twice in two years? I don't think so. Even Thomas was 2 years younger than Fuglsang is now.

Fuglsang has been pro since 2006 - 13 years ago. Best GT result 7th in 2013 TdF.

Top 5 would be a good result for Fuglsang. Best in his career. But a podium is doubtful. All the training and periodisation of the grand tour contenders and teams is geared to the big races these days. Sure the sponsors want wins at Dauphine but the TdF is the big fish. That is when everyone is 100%. Not week long races like Dauphine.
Let me ask you a question:

How often do we really see people being levels below the best riders throughout the season to then suddenly winning Tours de France?

That's not often. Nibali and the 2017 Froome is the only rider to really have done something like that in this decade. Everybody else had been firing on all cylinders throughout the season.

I don't give much for that periodisation argument. I know sports scientists think it's all the rave, but statistically speaking, I don't see much evidence pointing to Tour winners periodising their early seasons into invisibility.

In 2018, Thomas won the Dauphiné and would have won both Tirreno and Algarve were it not for a chain loss and a weird tactical situation.

In 2017, Froome got 4th in the Dauphiné which was his best result so far this season but he had the Vuelta in mind.

In 2016, Froome won the Dauphiné and the Herald Sun Tour (LOL) but might also have contested the Romandie win if he didn't puncture at a fatal time on the first mountain stage (he did win a stage from a break and got close on the TT later in the race).

In 2015, Froome won the Dauphiné and the Ruta del Sol (over Contador) and was third in Romandie.

In 2014, Nibali didn't do anything until becoming Italian champion so he doesn't really do my point any favours.

In 2013, Froome won the Dauphiné, Romandie, Critérium International and the Tour of Oman, and he was only beaten in Tirreno by Nibali on the legendary Porto Sant'Elpidio stage where Sagan somehow outclimbed him together with Nibali and Purito.

In 2012, Wiggins won the Dauphiné, Romandie and Paris-Nice and he was third in Algarve.

In 2011, Evans won Romandie and Tirreno and was second in the Dauphiné.

In 2010, Contador won Algarve, Paris-Nice and Castilla y León and was second in the Dauphiné.

In 2009, Contador won Algarve and País Vasco, hungerflatted himself out of winning Paris-Nice and was third in the Dauphiné.

So in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013, the dominant stage racer of the spring also won the Tour, while arguably one of the most dominating spring riders won in 2015, 2016 and 2018.

Tour-winning form rarely comes out of nowhere.
In 2010., Andy Schleck 82. at Tirreno, 18. in Amstel, 8. at FW, 5. at LBL, 21. in California, 14. in Suisse.
But that's the last year of the previous decade, so I guess it doesn't count.
Don't even get me started on Schleck and his pre-Tour performances...
Come on, I'm curious.
 
Re:

Cookster15 said:
Fuglsang has been pro since 2006 - 13 years ago. Best GT result 7th in 2013 TdF.

Top 5 would be a good result for Fuglsang. Best in his career. But a podium is doubtful. All the training and periodisation of the grand tour contenders and teams is geared to the big races these days. Sure the sponsors want wins at Dauphine but the TdF is the big fish. That is when everyone is 100%. Not week long races like Dauphine.
How about this guy. 37yo at the time when he checked in second at the finish line of TdF
 
Re:

sir fly said:
Somehow I think this year's Dauphine isn't a good predictor for the Tour.
There aren’t many better predictors available, though. Even if Bernal does win the Tour, you could hardly call Suisse a predictor unless Benoot and Dennis end up in the top 10.
 
Re: Re:

klintE said:
Cookster15 said:
Fuglsang has been pro since 2006 - 13 years ago. Best GT result 7th in 2013 TdF.

Top 5 would be a good result for Fuglsang. Best in his career. But a podium is doubtful. All the training and periodisation of the grand tour contenders and teams is geared to the big races these days. Sure the sponsors want wins at Dauphine but the TdF is the big fish. That is when everyone is 100%. Not week long races like Dauphine.
How about this guy. 37yo at the time when he checked in second at the finish line of TdF
Good catch. Yeh I remember old man Peraud in 2011. Then he backed up with a podium in 2014. Okay that firms the case for Fuglsang but I am still sceptical.
 
Re: Re:

Leinster said:
sir fly said:
Somehow I think this year's Dauphine isn't a good predictor for the Tour.
There aren’t many better predictors available, though. Even if Bernal does win the Tour, you could hardly call Suisse a predictor unless Benoot and Dennis end up in the top 10.
Suisse might've been a better predictor with a stronger field. But that's not what I meant to say.
There won't be many similarities between Dauphine GC and the Tour GC. And I think mostly because of Dauphine design and riders' buildup cycles.
 
Re: Re:

Cookster15 said:
klintE said:
Cookster15 said:
Fuglsang has been pro since 2006 - 13 years ago. Best GT result 7th in 2013 TdF.

Top 5 would be a good result for Fuglsang. Best in his career. But a podium is doubtful. All the training and periodisation of the grand tour contenders and teams is geared to the big races these days. Sure the sponsors want wins at Dauphine but the TdF is the big fish. That is when everyone is 100%. Not week long races like Dauphine.
How about this guy. 37yo at the time when he checked in second at the finish line of TdF
Good catch. Yeh I remember old man Peraud in 2011. Then he backed up with a podium in 2014. Okay that firms the case for Fuglsang but I am still sceptical.
Peraud only turned pro at the age of 32 though, so he actually reached his peak fairly quickly.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS