Who will win 2013 GIRO?

Page 10 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Who will win 2013 GIRO?

  • Others

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Eshnar said:
Evans just raced a GT while not at 100% and you probly saw how he went.
Samuel Sanchez... we will be able to discuss upon it when he'll finally manage to properly race a GT from the start to the end, as for now there's no evidence at all he's so strong as you seem to think.

And Cobo I hope you're just trolling lol. What did he ever do other than that Vuelta (and btw Nibali won a Vuelta too... why doesn't that matter, if it does for Cobo?)
i dont know about now since he has been plagued with misfortune last 2 gts he tried, but 07 Vuleta, 09 Vuelta Sanchez showed far better tt skills than Nibali has, and most importantly 2010 Tour (where we couldnt see him tt properly since he had a brokenw wrist) he showed significantly greater mountain skills than Nibali has.

Of course Nibali may reach a higher level with time, but if we assume he is still (just about) at a level similar to 2010, then yes Samu is a better gt rider than Nibali. For today.
 
El Pistolero said:
Nibali is almost 28 years old. Rodriguez is almost 34 years old. I'd keep that in mind when comparing the two. ;)
no. Just no.

No one asked who would win in 5 or 10 years time. The question is who would win NOW. And last i checked the GC of a grand tour does not care how old you are. If you finish a gt 5 seconds behind someone it doesn't matter whether you are 19 years old or 50. It still counts as behind

The riders age is totally irrelevant.
 
Afrank said:
Vuelta 2010
Stage 20
Nibali- 2nd +1
Rodriguez- 3rd +23

stage 16
Nibali-10th +1'50
Rodriguez- 4th +1'22

stage 14
Nibali- 2nd +20
Rodriguez- 1st

stage 11
Nibali- 6th +23
Rodriguez- 18th +59

In this race, Rodriguez was stronger in the mountains but in the 2011 Giro

stage 9
Nibali- 4th '50
rodriguez- 26th 2'21

Stage 13
Nibali- 8th 1'36
Rodriguez-12th 1'52

Stage 14
Nibali- 3rd '40
Rodriguez- 11th 2'24

Stage 15
Nibali- 7th 3'34
Rodriguez- 8th 3'34

Stage 20
Nibali- 11th 6'20
Rodriguez- 3rd 4'50

Clearly Nibali was the stronger climber in this race.

In the 2013 Giro Nibali and Rodriguez's performance in the mountains I think will be comparable, but Nibali I think will beat Rodriguez in the long run thanks to his TT.
2010 Rodriguez had just done the tour de france + before that he had done Suiise, Ardennes, Volta Catalunya, Vuelta Pais Vasco and Paris Nice - all of them fighting for the win or for stages.

Its a miracle he had some energy left for the Vuelta. I mean Froome this year didnt do a 3rd of that schedule and cracked far worse than Rodriguez did that year.

As for 2011 Giro, illness did seem to effect him. I mean I know in the giro, especially 1 that brutal, a lot of people fall ill, but in light of Puritos last 2 gt performances, and the fact that he actually did contend in the 2 stages after he managed to recover from illness, i would say it had a very negative effect on him.
 
His best climbing performances have come since the 2011 Giro (Dauphine, Giro, Vuelta). The bloke who was a class above Contador on aerobic efforts a few months ago is clearly not the same one who blew up in Andorra or was no where on Etna. There's nothing to suggest that come May he will have regressed back those darker days.
 
cineteq said:
Wow, just wow! LOL! Ryo and Pisto, take it away.
:confused:

In both my posts the principle that we are comparing rider's current abilities and.not.their future.abilities is quite.clearly laid out.

So.im unsure whether this was a not thought through trolling attempt or whether you legitimately failed to understand the sentences.

Of course you have a storied history of both, but judging by the fact that you ask 2 other posters for help rather than point anything out yourself ill guess its the trolling and not the ignorance on this occasion.

Am I right?
 
The Hitch said:
He won the Tour that year off form. Unless you think finishing a tt outside the top 30, a handful of seconds ahead of Andy Schleck, is Contador at 100%.
Was he really off form for that Tour? He was pretty strong on the cobbles, considering he missed the Spartacus group. All the favorites failed at that TT because of the wind. Menchov didn't, but he was the strongest at that point.
 
The Hitch said:
:confused:

In both my posts the principle that we are comparing rider's current abilities and.not.their future.abilities is quite.clearly laid out.

So.im unsure whether this was a not thought through trolling attempt or whether you legitimately failed to understand the sentences.

Of course you have a storied history of both, but judging by the fact that you ask 2 other posters for help rather than point anything out yourself ill guess its the trolling and not the ignorance on this occasion.

Am I right?
you say that we are talking about now and that is why we shouldn't dismiss rodrigues despite him being early 34 but you are using results from over 2 years ago to prove that sanchez is still better then nibali, so you are contradicting yourself.
 
The Hitch said:
i dont know about now since he has been plagued with misfortune last 2 gts he tried, but 07 Vuleta, 09 Vuelta Sanchez showed far better tt skills than Nibali has, and most importantly 2010 Tour (where we couldnt see him tt properly since he had a brokenw wrist) he showed significantly greater mountain skills than Nibali has.

Of course Nibali may reach a higher level with time, but if we assume he is still (just about) at a level similar to 2010, then yes Samu is a better gt rider than Nibali. For today.
by the same reasoning Menchov is a better gt rider than Nibali. (edit: AND Sanchez is WAY better than Purito)

Really, 2010 is two years ago and will become 3 years ago by the time we reach next May....
 
The Hitch said:
:confused:

In both my posts the principle that we are comparing rider's current abilities and.not.their future.abilities is quite.clearly laid out.

So.im unsure whether this was a not thought through trolling attempt or whether you legitimately failed to understand the sentences.

Am I right?
I don't think so. Current abilities = next year abilities. Cadel Evans have already proved you wrong when it comes to age which can be an important factor. Purito may or may not perform well next year, and if he doesn't we can surely blame it in part to his age.

Seeing the outrage by other posters on your comments display who's the real troll here. ;)
 
Parrulo said:
you say that we are talking about now and that is why we shouldn't dismiss rodrigues despite him being early 34 but you are using results from over 2 years ago to prove that sanchez is still better then nibali, so you are contradicting yourself.
Excuse me, I did not "prove" nor attempt to prove sanchez is still better than nibali, i used the only reference point we have for sanchez, in a discussion about how.can we know how good sanchez is, to prove that he WAS better than nibali and that he therefore MIGHT still be so long as we use the assumption ( conditional) that he has not deteriorated too much. that sentence structure fully allows for.the possibility of nibali being better than sanchez now.

In fact in the first post i even.post this making it very.clear that nibalis potential Cannot be taken into account in such a comparison, which is exactly what i say in the 2nd post.

Of course Nibali may reach a higher level with time, but....
So please do explain to.me.exactly how that post adressing the question on whether sanchez is better than nibali today ( and where i clearly point out the irrelevance of nibalis future potential) contradicts with my second post that future potential is irrelevant in a gt .

Oh and i do actually think nibali will beat purito at the giro. But it will be because of the tt and not because he gets some.bonus seconds for.having future potential.

cineteq said:
I don't think so. Current abilities = next year abilities. Cadel Evans have already proved you wrong when it comes to age which can be an important factor. Purito may or may not perform well next year, and if he doesn't we can surely blame it in part to his age.)
Hey pea brain. How is that me contradicting.myself?

I say - age doesn't matter.
You say - ugh no, age DOES matter, Evans proves it, and hitch is contradicting himself.

If i say 1 thing and you say another that's YOU contradicting ME. Not me contradicting myself.

Think it.over. Do you see how.it.works ;)
 
The Hitch said:
Hey pea brain. How is that me contradicting.myself?

I say - age doesn't matter.
You say - ugh no, age DOES matter, Evans proves it, and hitch is contradicting himself.

If i say 1 thing and you say another that's YOU contradicting ME. Not me contradicting myself.

Think it.over. Do you see how.it.works ;)
Pea brain? LOL!!!! I haven't read anybody more convoluted than yourself.



Let me know when you figure it out. :)
 
cineteq said:
Pea brain? LOL!!!! I haven't read anybody more convoluted than yourself.



Let me know when you figure it out. :)
I have nothing against the occasional insult, or even picture if you struggle with words, but you might want to occasionally add some substance to your posts.

An Ad hominem or 2 there may have been (and pea brain if you look it up is quite gentle) but i also adressed the subject at hand, and laid out the case that you had made an error of judgment and I had not contradicted myself.

Your response meanwhile, as is often the case with your posts, consists of several insults followed by a smiley.

Do you seriously think other posters are bothered in the slightest if some guy they dont know, who disagrees with them ends a discussion with a bunch of insults and a picture of a fat man?

Away from the playground engaging people in a discussion can often provide more success in making them feel angry (which i assume is your aim) than " I know you are but what am I"
 
The Hitch said:
An Ad hominem or 2 there may have been (and pea brain if you look it up is quite gentle) but i also adressed the subject at hand, and laid out the case that you had made an error of judgment and I had not contradicted myself.

Your response meanwhile, as is often the case with your posts, consists of several insults followed by a smiley.

Do you seriously think other posters are bothered in the slightest if some guy they dont know, who disagrees with them ends a discussion with a bunch of insults and a picture of a fat man?
You can only fool the newbies with your words. You have called me idiot countless times. Responses from other posters to you clearly show what they think of you, and show who you really are. Stop playing the victim and take accountability for what you say or try to say, and maybe you'll be respected. This is the end of this conversation. Over and out.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,455
3
0
If age doesn't matter then why are you talking about Jrod's results from a year ago(at the time the Giro will start next year).

Obviously age matters. It wouldn't be the first time that a rider all of a sudden is past it after a good year: Mario Cipollini, Robbie Mcewen, Chris Horner, Moreno Argentin(pre-EPO), Michele Bartoli, Laurent Jalabert, maybe Evans, maybe Thor Hushovd, etc
 
Oct 5, 2011
18
0
0
Prediction

Hard to answer. On one hand Nibali have not finished the strength to win a hard Giro. Hesjedal is a runner but worst kind of Wiggins Wiggins cyclist so 100% must win. Rodriguez has improved mentally and I think that will help a lot in 2013. Now there is less and the stages will be very hard to say. His problem is still the time trial, we will see if anything has improved.
 

airstream

BANNED
Mar 29, 2011
5,122
0
0
The Hitch said:
He won the Tour that year off form. Unless you think finishing a tt outside the top 30, a handful of seconds ahead of Andy Schleck, is Contador at 100%.
Ocean of pro- Contador utopia. Hell, if you pretend to be objective in a way, you realize that any rider has his relative up and downs and essentially it's a bottomless discussion whether either Contador was weaker than in 2010 or Schleck, Menchov, Sanchez were stronger than before that? A rider is good so much as others let him to be good. You blindly hung on in 2009 as that relation of forces became a benchmark just cuz it suits unconditionally and anything else is an aberration.

Cycling hierarchy according to the Hitch:
Contador
................................
................................
Others

If Contador loses or collides with serious resistance, he's on off-form.

Hilarious than the forum member with such ludicrous views criticizes other posters' logic, calls ones trolls and idiots...

Poor Vincenzo Nibali, Purito Rodriguez and others. Their eternal destiny to try to beat an off-form (exactly like that otherwise they'd better not start) Contador just because the Hitch said this way.
 
airstream said:
Ocean of pro- Contador utopia. Hell, if you pretend to be objective in a way, you realize that any rider has his relative up and downs and essentially it's a bottomless discussion whether either Contador was weaker than in 2010 or Schleck, Menchov, Sanchez were stronger than before that? A rider is good so much as others let him to be good. You blindly hung on in 2009 as that relation of forces became a benchmark just cuz it suits unconditionally and anything else is an aberration.

Cycling hierarchy according to the Hitch:
Contador
................................
................................
Others

If Contador loses or collides with serious resistance, he's on off-form.

Hilarious than the forum member with such ludicrous views criticizes other posters' logic, calls ones trolls and idiots...

Poor Vincenzo Nibali, Purito Rodriguez and others. Their eternal destiny to try to beat an off-form Contador just because the Hitch said this way.
It's true of course. I am getting tired of the Contador propaganda. If he lost the Vuelta it would have been because of lack of racing but Froome did not get much sympathy for backing up and finishing the race when he could have pulled out at any time like others would have. Froome would have known after the first five days that he was not going to make the podium. Maybe the riders that beat Contador should be given more credit. It's impossible to be in peak form for every grand tour when sickness or injury can impact or riders can lose form for no reason at all. There was never much sympathy for Evans or Gesink when they failed but if Contador fails it's like a day of mourning, we should all wear black until the next grand tour ?
 
Mar 31, 2010
18,136
2
0
Afrank said:
Vuelta 2010
Stage 20
Nibali- 2nd +1
Rodriguez- 3rd +23

stage 16
Nibali-10th +1'50
Rodriguez- 4th +1'22

stage 14
Nibali- 2nd +20
Rodriguez- 1st

stage 11
Nibali- 6th +23
Rodriguez- 18th +59

In this race, Rodriguez was stronger in the mountains but in the 2011 Giro

stage 9
Nibali- 4th '50
rodriguez- 26th 2'21

Stage 13
Nibali- 8th 1'36
Rodriguez-12th 1'52

Stage 14
Nibali- 3rd '40
Rodriguez- 11th 2'24

Stage 15
Nibali- 7th 3'34
Rodriguez- 8th 3'34

Stage 20
Nibali- 11th 6'20
Rodriguez- 3rd 4'50

Clearly Nibali was the stronger climber in this race.

In the 2013 Giro Nibali and Rodriguez's performance in the mountains I think will be comparable, but Nibali I think will beat Rodriguez in the long run thanks to his TT.
in the giro 2011 rodirguez was on anti biotic for almost full first 2 weeks :rolleyes:

I see you also took vuelta 2010, while he did the tour of 2010 as wlel. what a lame argument is that to compare it
 
Mar 31, 2010
18,136
2
0
El Pistolero said:
If age doesn't matter then why are you talking about Jrod's results from a year ago(at the time the Giro will start next year).

Obviously age matters. It wouldn't be the first time that a rider all of a sudden is past it after a good year: Mario Cipollini, Robbie Mcewen, Chris Horner, Moreno Argentin(pre-EPO), Michele Bartoli, Laurent Jalabert, maybe Evans, maybe Thor Hushovd, etc
I didn't know you had a magical ball in which you can see what year a rider drops back in level :rolleyes:

since purito has actually been improving consistantly for the past 3 years there's no reason to suspect that will stop all of a sudden
 
movingtarget said:
It's true of course. I am getting tired of the Contador propaganda. If he lost the Vuelta it would have been because of lack of racing but Froome did not get much sympathy for backing up and finishing the race when he could have pulled out at any time like others would have. Froome would have known after the first five days that he was not going to make the podium. Maybe the riders that beat Contador should be given more credit. It's impossible to be in peak form for every grand tour when sickness or injury can impact or riders can lose form for no reason at all. There was never much sympathy for Evans or Gesink when they failed but if Contador fails it's like a day of mourning, we should all wear black until the next grand tour ?
Many have mentioned the lack of form (or illness) of Evans in the 2012 Tour, Froome having the Tour in his legs for the 2012 Vuelta, and even Andy being a bit off form for the 2011 Tour. It's not just Contador that gets this benefit of the doubt. Credit was given to Purito having improved in every way with his Giro and Vuelta performances in 2012. I'm quite certain that Purito and Valverde (had he not lost the time from his crash early in the Vuelta) were and would've given Contador the scare of his life similar to the one he experienced from Andy when he pulled out his Tour win in the final ITT in
2010. I'm quite certain that if you reference the forum during those particular periods you will find sympathy shown for Evans and maybe for Gesink (but not from the Dutch who are harder on Gesink than anyone :eek: ).

Until proven otherwise Contador is simply the rider to beat when it comes to grand tours. Do you wonder why his is the first name generally mentioned when the predictions on who will win/contend are presented?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY