Vaughters on Astana, Armstrong in 2009 TdF (not good)

[VeloCity]

It makes no sense that an entire team is going to drag a has-been through the tour.

It makes no sense at all, but instead of putting all of their resources - including Armstrong - firmly behind the rider with the best chance of winning - ie Contador - JB allowed the team to become divided by letting Armstrong ride for himself ("the race will decide who the team leader is"). If they had backed Contador completely - and it's absurd that they didn't - he probably would've won by an even greater margin and Armstrong probably wouldn't have finished top 5.

To quote a comment on the CW site: "Bruyneel invested foolishly in his past and not wisely in his future."

 

[Cerberus]

True, I stand corrected.

30 seconds down in 4th with a repeat of Annecy, even with Frank with a flat stage.

Still looking at 4th going into Ventoux either way with a shot at the podium... would have actually made it a lot more entertaining climb. It did look like Lance could have done something.

Big difference then saying he wouldn't have been in contention for a podium spot like some claim.

IMO Armstrong did benefit a lot from his team-mates and the Columbia-forced Side wind break on stage 3, but Wiggins also got a fair amount of help from Vandevelde and Frank Schleck got a fair amount of help from Andy on stage 17. The way I see it number 3 through 7 in the GC was very, very close in strength.

This has been reviewed many times. Armstrong would have been 5th if the TTT had been replaced by a 45km TT.

Assuming everything else goes the same and that the ITT gives the same results as Annecy he'd finish 4th. Granted these assumptions might not hold, but things could have worked out better for Armstrong as well as worse. Assuming a flat stage he's as I said seperated from Frank Schleck by less than a second, and again we can't predict which way that would have gone.

 

[theyoungest]

Yes, LA benefited from a strong team, but my recollection of the TTT is that LA was at least as much of a workhorse who guided the team through some of the more difficult sections of the course.

By his own account, Armstrong wasn't going very well in that TTT. He got a lot of television time, though.

 

[BroDeal]

Jeebus! How many threads is this subject being discussed in now. Four?

Can someone please create a fifth thread for it. I don't think we have enough.

 

[BYOP88]

I disagree about Kloden. Helping lance on Verbier cost Kloden what... 30 seconds maybe? Contador's attack on Grand Bornand that dropped Kloden may have cost him a lot more. If Contador hadn't attacked and Kloden had stayed on with the break... he gains 2 and a half minutes.

Kloden has a right to be annoyed with both of them... but if he were going to be more ****ed at one over the other, I'd think he'd direct more angst toward Contador for asking if he could attack... then when he said no attacking anyway.

Ok for one final time, if Contador didn't attack on the Grand Bornand and let the Schleck bros do the work and Kloden stayed with them, then Armstrong wouldn't have made the podium. Astana were never going to do a 1-2-3 with baby Schleck in the race. Plus as has been said many times before in other threads, when Armstrong was the team number 1, there was never any chat about bagging a 1-2-3 or even a 1-2, it was 8 worker bees and the queen.

 

[mr. tibbs]

I do not buy the Kloden angle some of you are selling. If he was that much stronger than Armstong, he would have simply rode past him (just as Contador did). It makes no sense that an entire team is going to drag a has-been through the tour. Not to mention, most of that team has signed on to do the same thing this year.

You people are blinded by your dislike for Armstrong. Most of you simply hate him. I am indifferent to the guy, but the fact is, he came in 3rd. All the other guys besides Contador and A Schleck came in behind him. If they could not beat a has-been that was being propped up by his stronger teammates, then so much the worse for them.

Kloden has been sacrificing his own ambitions for a team leader, regardless of relative strength, throughout his career. That's what he does.

Remember in 2007 when Vino was the touted favorite going in, but then had the nasty crash that ruined his chances? He was clearly much weaker than Kloden after that crash, but, in the first mountainous stage (somebody remember which stage it was?), Kloden rode pace for his fallen captain. It was pretty obvious that he could have "ridden past him," but he didn't.

The same thing was true for at least a couple of editions of the Tour at T-mobile, where an ailing Ulrich wasn't at his best for one reason or another and Kloden, though seeming a little stronger, rode against his own interests to protect Ulrich.

That's just how Kloden operates.

 

[cineteq]

Jeebus! How many threads is this subject being discussed in now. Four?

Can someone please create a fifth thread for it. I don't think we have enough.

Right! What with these *people* what-ifs, hijacking this thread?
TdF 2009 is in the past.
Focus on Voughters and Armstrong's cheap punches

 

[BYOP88]

Remember in 2007 when Vino was the touted favorite going in, but then had the nasty crash that ruined his chances? He was clearly much weaker than Kloden after that crash, but, in the first mountainous stage (somebody remember which stage it was?), Kloden rode pace for his fallen captain. It was pretty obvious that he could have "ridden past him," but he didn't.

In that Tour stage 7 was the 1st mountain stage, but I think it was the next day where Rasmussen won that Kloden dropped back to work for Vino.

 

[Cerberus]

Right! What with these *people* what-ifs, hijacking this thread?
TdF 2009 is in the past.
Focus on Voughters and Armstrong's cheap punches

On that topic it was a great double-*****-slap from Vaughters.

 

[mr. tibbs]

In that Tour stage 7 was the 1st mountain stage, but I think it was the next day where Rasmussen won that Kloden dropped back to work for Vino.

You're right, I was just looking it up. Stage 7 was Gerdemenn's brilliant coup. i remember watching that from a hotel room in Idaho (was at a friend's wedding). My wife was not pleased with me jumping up and down and cheering for the young German at 6 in the morning after a raucous celebration.

Ah, the joys of being a cycling fan in the States.

 

[ErmOkk]

Yes the what-ifs bother me too. There's only what was, no what-ifs, people ain't predictable machines. What if AC had to pee and Lance attacked if the stage was replaced by a flat one? What if Wiggings & Armstrong ego's met eachother and caused a big crash so that Van Hummel turned a 30 minutes disadvantage into an advantage? It's insane .

 

[Carboncrank]

I thought people here hated talking about Lance so much you wanted to restrict it to one thread?

Tell the truth, you can't get enough can you.

 

[B.Rasmussen]

I thought people here hated talking about Lance so much you wanted to restrict it to one thread?

Tell the truth, you can't get enough can you.

They just want to make sure you are kept busy so you don't sit in your basement all day putting needles in TFF dolls.

It's still early in the day for you. You still have much to write or you don't meet your quota. Get on with it.

 

[Anonymous]

They just want to make sure you are kept busy so you don't sit in your basement all day putting needles in TFF dolls.

It's still early in the day for you. You still have much to write or you don't meet your quota. Get on with it.

I have the guy on ignore, so his voo doo doesn't work on me. I have to tell you, it is nice not reading his stupidity...except in the occasional reply. Usually I can turn away quickly enough not to get any stupid on me, but every once and awhile, I get slimed.

 

[Azdak6]

IMO Armstrong did benefit a lot from his team-mates and the Columbia-forced Side wind break on stage 3, but Wiggins also got a fair amount of help from Vandevelde and Frank Schleck got a fair amount of help from Andy on stage 17. The way I see it number 3 through 7 in the GC was very, very close in strength.



Assuming everything else goes the same and that the ITT gives the same results as Annecy he'd finish 4th. Granted these assumptions might not hold, but things could have worked out better for Armstrong as well as worse. Assuming a flat stage he's as I said seperated from Frank Schleck by less than a second, and again we can't predict which way that would have gone.

Logic and reason have no place in a Virtual Tour. The best thing about Virtual Tours is that you can make them turn out exactly the way you want.

 

[Crunchy Frog]

gee, why don't you tell us how you feel

It really is ok for these guys to go knocking eachother around.

Vaughters did live in those circles: http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2005/vaughters_1999


let's go by punch buggy' rules


Standard Game

Now that we have established what a Punch Buggy is - what do you do when you see one?

You say "Punch Buggy" while simultaneously belting the person you're with on the shoulder. Not hard. Just enough to make contact felt. It is not necessary to add "no punch back" when calling a Punch Buggy. Punch-backs are verboten (not allowed) and will cost you one point for each punch thrown - not to mention show you up as a spoilsport and may get you grounded.


Scoring

One point is awarded to the first person who calls it for each Punch Buggy seen. If you wrongly identify a car as a Punch Buggy and call it, one point is deducted from you score. If you have already hit the person with whom you're playing and then the misidentification is confirmed the person wrongly Punch Buggied may at his discretion double punch the offender immediately or he may save the mis-punch until the next time you have a legitimate Punch Buggy and he can 'take the hit away from you.' To do that the victim of the misidentification and hit says "Save it for later." The next time you spot a legitimate Punch Buggy you can still call it however you are banned from following through with a hit. If you forget and hit anyway you forfeit the game and the other guy wins.

Time Outs

You have the option of being a party pooper and calling a time out. This will suspend a game in progress, which may be resumed at a later time. However you may NOT call "Time in - Punch Buggy - Time out!" all in one sentence just as you see a punch buggy. This will result in a fine of twenty-five (25) points for the first infraction and your parents get to choose how much the fine goes up for each additional infraction. You may also be risking great bodily harm depending on with whom you're playing...

Any and all Volkswagen Dealerships are automatically on time out as are all of the cars on the lot. When a Punch Buggy drives off the lot, as they all must sooner or later, it has exited the 'zone of disallowance' and is fair game. Punch Buggies on non-Volkswagen car lots are not under this restriction. So if there's a used car lot down the street with three used New Beetles on the lot - go for it! This is called the Punch Buggy Prime Directive. Violating this rule will get you in deep do-do.

Note: Punch Buggies being moved from a car-carrier parked in the street in front of a Volkswagen dealership to the lot or vice-versa may or may not be fair game. This remains tied up in the rules comity. A decision is expected any day now...


The "NON-CONTACT" version of Punch Buggy

It is possible to play a non-contact version of Punch Buggy. The rules are exactly the same as for the conventional game with the exception that you don't get to hit the person you're playing with. This can be advisable if there are only two of you playing and the other person is driving. Getting hit while you're driving could be bad. Another time when you may choose to play the non-contact version would be on a school field trip where the authorities (teachers, bus monitors, or whatever) may not be Punch Buggy friendly. Use your best judgment here. I will not be held liable for you getting grounded on the bus instead of seeing the National Air and Space Museum or where ever else you may be going because the bus monitor thought you were getting too rowdy. OK?


The Punch Buggy in the Family

The ‘owner’ of a Punch Buggy and members of the owner’s household may not be punched for a Punch Buggy that is a member of their family.* Likewise, others cannot be punched by the ‘owner’ or any member of the owner’s household for the family Punch Buggy. However, anyone who is not a member of the Punch Buggies immediate family are allowed to punch each other, provided all of the other rules of the game are being adhered to. So your annoying cousins from back east are allowed to punch each other for your Punch Buggy, but they can’t punch you and you can’t punch them (no matter how much you may want to…) if the Punch Buggy in question is a member of your household.

* You don’t really “own” a Punch Buggy. You adopt them and they become members of the family. If you have a Punch Buggy in the family you will understand what I mean…


A Note of Caution

Have fun, don't hit anyone harder than you want to be hit, and don't make too much noise. Dad doesn't like too much noise from the back seat while he's driving! ;-)

Shouldn't there/couldn't there be a variation in which you get to punch the driver of the said buggy ? That'd be much more fun.

Personally, I 'dry spit' whenever I run across a Nazi-mobile. Modern variant of the thing included.

(Rant over)

 

[kurtinsc]

Shouldn't there/couldn't there be a variation in which you get to punch the driver of the said buggy ? That'd be much more fun.

Personally, I 'dry spit' whenever I run across a Nazi-mobile. Modern variant of the thing included.

(Rant over)

I'm guessing you're not a fan of "fanta" either then (Coke's "Nazi" soft drink)? Or any kind of IBM product (Made the computing machines used to "process" jews through concentration camps)? Or Siemens (made all sorts of Nazi products, including the ovens used to creamate murdered jews)? Hugo Boss (made the Nazi uniforms)? Or Bayer (made the gas used to kill jews)?

 

[BroDeal]

I'm guessing you're not a fan of "fanta" either then (Coke's "Nazi" soft drink)? Or any kind of IBM product (Made the computing machines used to "process" jews through concentration camps)? Or Siemens (made all sorts of Nazi products, including the ovens used to creamate murdered jews)? Hugo Boss (made the Nazi uniforms)? Or Bayer (made the gas used to kill jews)?

Let's not forget anything made by an American company. Their tax money goes to fund the current--not seventy years ago--genocide of the Palestinians.

 

[this_is_edie]

to get back to the OP, I find it interesting that JV feels that now he can needle LA in the media - that was a direct jab to make him look foolish. Why now?

 

[BroDeal]

to get back to the OP, I find it interesting that JV feels that now he can needle LA in the media - that was a direct jab to make him look foolish. Why now?

Why not? Armstrong's behavior last season exposed his bad sportsmanship and childish behavior to everyone. Even people who consider themselves fans of his have had to admit that it is pathetic. Now is the perfect time to capitalize on it because Armstrong has shown that he is easily baited into making himself look even more foolish.

 

[Gregory]

This is actually a very good observation from Vaughters. Suprisingly almost no one had noticed that Astana's strategy despite their great strength was very different from that of US Postal/Discovery.

Andorra Arcalis was the best example. In the old days there would've been a train, and riders like Heras, Rubiera, Azevedo exhausting themselves completely and quickly reducing the group to Armstrong and at best a couple of other guys (BTW, there was never even a question of riders other than Armstorng from Postal/Discovery riding for themselves in the GC despite their good position and chances (like Heras and Azevedo - it shows well the absurdity and hypocrisy in using "team" rhetoric against Contador in 2009 ).

On Andorra the tempo was merely solid, the group still large. The goal was completely different - not to split the field, but to preserve the time differences from the earlier stages. This strategy was 100% pro-Lance, and 100% against Contador. Contador would have benefited from the leadout in the old USPostal style, but it was very inconvenient for him to attack, when the Astana train was pretty much intact. On the other hand Lance was securing in this way his gains from the "split" stage and from TTT. Were it not for the attacks of Evans on Arcalis and SaxoBank on Verbier, which caused the possibility of counterattack, Contador would have been in trouble.

 

[BroDeal]

(BTW, there was never even a question of riders other than Armstorng from Postal/Discovery riding for themselves in the GC despite their good position and chances (like Heras and Azevedo - it shows well the absurdity and hypocrisy in using "team" rhetoric against Contador in 2009 ).

Yup. Let's not forget that when FLandis did a good time trial, Armstrong and Bruyneel took him to the woodshed and beat the hell out of him for wasting strength by going too hard.

Armstrong gets p!ssed off even when people tell the truth--maybe especially when people tell the truth.

 

[kurtinsc]

This is actually a very good observation from Vaughters. Suprisingly almost no one had noticed that Astana's strategy despite their great strength was very different from that of US Postal/Discovery.

Andorra Arcalis was the best example. In the old days there would've been a train, and riders like Heras, Rubiera, Azevedo exhausting themselves completely and quickly reducing the group to Armstrong and at best a couple of other guys (BTW, there was never even a question of riders other than Armstorng from Postal/Discovery riding for themselves in the GC despite their good position and chances (like Heras and Azevedo - it shows well the absurdity and hypocrisy in using "team" rhetoric against Contador in 2009 ).

On Andorra the tempo was merely solid, the group still large. The goal was completely different - not to split the field, but to preserve the time differences from the earlier stages. This strategy was 100% pro-Lance, and 100% against Contador. Contador would have benefited from the leadout in the old USPostal style, but it was very inconvenient for him to attack, when the Astana train was pretty much intact. On the other hand Lance was securing in this way his gains from the "split" stage and from TTT. Were it not for the attacks of Evans on Arcalis and SaxoBank on Verbier, which caused the possibility of counterattack, Contador would have been in trouble.

Did Contador counter on Verbier... or did he mark Frank's attack... let things settle back, then attack on his own to be followed by Andy?

Saxo did the whole "shred the peleton" thing at the base of the climb with Cancellera and Voigt, but my (admittedly hazy) memory had Contador going in the lead of an attack rather then countering someone.

 

[Carboncrank]

I have the guy on ignore, so his voo doo doesn't work on me. I have to tell you, it is nice not reading his stupidity...except in the occasional reply.

which means you read most everything i write.

Have a nice day.

 

[Ferminal]

.

Of course he did, B. Rass. quoted you.