Professional Cycling For the Fans - Stage 21: Corbeil- Paris

i wonder what vino could accomplish with a team like disco firmly behind him. scary.

Also, the American market is all about selling Treks and Nike off the back of the TdF, so I don't see how the Spring classics or Giro or Tour of Spain or whatever fit's into that game plan. quoted for truth.

btw, to whoever asked why Discovery won the Giro. The answer to that is that they really weren't planning on winning the Giro. They had signed Salvodelli after his two disapointing seasons with T-Mobile and figured if worse comes to worse they can make him a good helper for Lance. Last time Salvodelli had delivered in a race was 3 years before... they weren't banking too much on him... this was fairly obvious due to the fact that Disco sent their 3rd string riders to the Giro to help Paolo (yes, 3rd string).

i wonder what vino could accomplish with a team like disco firmly behind him. scary.

Hmm, I don't know. I'm not sure that his riding style would benefit from being team leader. He thrives on attacks and breakaways. I think that Basso and Ullrich are better overall riders. Remember that Vino got dropped from the leader group in the mountians on more than one occasion.

It seems that the TdF is about the Alps, Pyrenees, and TTs. Vino rides with a helluva lot of gusto and is very exciting to watch. But that doesn't necessarily translate to GC wins in the TdF. Vino is about the same age as Ullrich, but Basso is younger than both of them by 4 years. Vino could end up playing the Jan Ullrich to Ivan Basso over the next couple of years...

i wonder what vino could accomplish with a team like disco firmly behind him. scary.

A couple places in GC is about all IMHO. A team wouldn't help him stay on Basso's wheel up a mountain or beat Ullrich in a TT. I don't think he can win the TdF.

OTOH, who says Disco has to focus on winning the TdF without Lance?? Without a clear favorite on the team, they no longer will be faced with pulling the peloton for thousands of km; it will be CSC and T-Mobile forced to the front. That should free them up for more attacks and long break aways. Vino could fit into that plan very well.

-murray

OTOH, who says Disco has to focus on winning the TdF without Lance?? Without a clear favorite on the team, they no longer will be faced with pulling the peloton for thousands of km; it will be CSC and T-Mobile forced to the front. That should free them up for more attacks and long break aways. Vino could fit into that plan very well.

Disco has shown good tactics in stage races outside of the GC. So yeah, I wouldn't be suprised if they have many tricks up their sleeves in next year's Tour, for stage wins or maybe a KOM. Vino could fit well, if he could listen to Brunyeel... I haven't yet seen him follow DS orders in the last few years, at all. Unless they decide they have a GC capable rider... which they may know in the spring (like how they analyzed Armstrong before the 1999 Tour and knew then that he was a potential winner)

I did a search for grusst in google and found a few german sights using the word. The context often seems to be as a signature. Such as:

Sincerely, Love, etc., at the end of a letter.

So, perhaps it is a term of love, or appreciation?

Merdingen salutes Jan Ullrich.

Sorry, didn't see your post before I posted mine.

Ok so Im abit confused here.

I just had a chance to watch the final stage on tivo and Phil and Paul say the race refs called all time bonuses off and that final GC was set and Levi had indeed won 5th place. This was at about 35km togo that they announced this. Were they misinformed or did the race refs change thier mind and reinstate the bonuses at the last moment??

Then I read this and it doesnt help me. From the official TdF site.


Although the race for general classification was effectively neutralized for the eight laps because rain fell as the peloton entered Paris, ‘Vino’ demonstrated that he had unfinished business.
While opportunists scampered ahead in mini-escapes on the Champs-Elysees the teams of the main sprint finish protagonists reeled them all in with less than three kilometers to go. Then, on the Quai des Tuileries ‘Vino’ chased down a move by Laurent Brochard. Suddenly he was in the lead of the stage with less than 1,500m to go. Brad McGee followed his lead and the Kazakh and Australian raced under the one kilometer with an unbeatable advantage on the peloton. In the dying meters ‘Vino’ blasted into the lead. Not even the stage winner could believe the coup he had just achieved. Not only did he win for the second time in the 2005 Tour, he elevated himself from sixth overall to fifth thanks to the time bonuses acquired for the victory.

Ok so Im abit confused here.

I just had a chance to watch the final stage on tivo and Phil and Paul say the race refs called all time bonuses off and that final GC was set and Levi had indeed won 5th place. This was at about 35km togo that they announced this. Were they misinformed or did the race refs change thier mind and reinstate the bonuses at the last moment??

Then I read this and it doesnt help me. From the official TdF site.

The official site had an anouncement that the time bonus for the second intermediate sprint was cancelled. That anouncement was made between the first and second intermediate sprint. It never mentioned the time bonus for the first intermediate sprint nor the finish. It would have been a mighty nasty show of bias against Vino to retroactively drop the time bonus he won due the crashes that came after the first intermediate sprint. They stopped the CG CLOCK after lap 1, but anounced the race for the stage win remained.

The time bonuses were pretty small (2 sec for the intermediate sprint winner, 20 sec for the final stage winner)-only significant in the tight Vino - Levi battle particularly with the clock off, so Paul and Phil may not have paid close attention to the details of the anouncement and overgenerallized the bonus dropping.

I think it was actually 6 for the intermediate sprint, but it balanced out as a 2 second gain because Levi got 4 for second at the sprint.

The reason for no mass start wins is pretty clear and applies to both the yellow and green jersey competitions, and incidently assured Rasmussen of the polkadot jersey: every race had the breakaway group that did not include anyone who was a threat to the top 5-6 riders so none of the top three teams had any incentive to chase down the breaks. Consequently, except for the break including Rasmussen, no one in a break had anything to gain except a stage victory. The sprinters must have been pretty frustrated 7/19-7/22 with the first 3 to 6 places already taken at the end of the day, but their teams were not willing to chase down the breaks either. Strange too that on the ultimate sprint that Levi let Vino go, even though his team was at the front in the last 500meters. Steve

This still does not make sense... If you say the GC clock stopped after lap 1 then the timing should have stopped period... That means that Leipheimer should have remained in 5th place. My understanding is that the time stopped but POINTS could still be gained but that is all.

If even the TDF judges had to debate the situation among themselves then there was a major misunderstanding which is a shame and nobody should lose their position as a result. According to Leipheimer and Gerolsteiner they thought that the GC was settled and therefore did not persue to even try to catch Vinokourov. Considering the weather conditions and the obvious blunder of the race management Leipheimer was robbed of his 5th postion regardless of whether or not Vinokourov would have won the stage. Vinokourov rode a great stage but Leipheimer was the more consistant of the two overall in my opinion and deserved the 5th place win considering the racing conditions of the day and the poor communication.

This still does not make sense... If you say the GC clock stopped after lap 1 then the timing should have stopped period... That means that Leipheimer should have remained in 5th place. My understanding is that the time stopped but POINTS could still be gained but that is all.

If even the TDF judges had to debate the situation among themselves then there was a major misunderstanding which is a shame and nobody should lose their position as a result. According to Leipheimer and Gerolsteiner they thought that the GC was settled and therefore did not persue to even try to catch Vinokourov. Considering the weather conditions and the obvious blunder of the race management Leipheimer was robbed of his 5th postion regardless of whether or not Vinokourov would have won the stage. Vinokourov rode a great stage but Leipheimer was the more consistant of the two overall in my opinion and deserved the 5th place win considering the racing conditions of the day and the poor communication.

Clock stopped but bonus time remained for the final. Leipheimer was a couple of tenths of a second ahead of Vilo after the 1st intermediate split. Once the clock stopped, unless Vilo got more bonus time than Levi, Levi gets 5th. Had Levi's team understood, Levi would have needed to beat Vilo (win the stage) to prevent Vilo from passing him on bonus.

Considering the weather conditions and the obvious blunder of the race management Leipheimer was robbed of his 5th postion regardless of whether or not Vinokourov would have won the stage. Vinokourov rode a great stage but Leipheimer was the more consistant of the two overall in my opinion and deserved the 5th place win considering the racing conditions of the day and the poor communication.


Following wheels for 21 days vs attacking day in day out and taking the race by the scruff of the neck on the last day. Vino was far more deserving of 5th place in my book.

From cyclingnews.com:

Cyclingnews spoke to Gerolsteiner's Levi Leipheimer after the 2005 Tour de France, where he was ticked off to lose his 5th place on GC (effectively €19,000 in prizemoney) to crazy Kazakhi Alexandre Vinokourov, who moved ahead of Levi after gaining 0'20 from the stage win time bonus yesterday in Paris. But Leipheimer, like many riders in the peloton, was informed that because the slippery final circuits of the Champs Elysées were neutralized by the race officials, no time bonuses would be awarded at the finish. "That's what we heard from our team, that the circuits were neutralized and no time bonuses would be awarded. It was a big surprise to me," he said.

Sounds like a pretty good cluster f*ck engineered by the race referees. They generally run a pretty tight ship but on this tour I draw issue with 2 very questionable decisions. 1. The Mcewan sprint DQ. 2. Last day timing issues and not being very clear about the finish line. Both had major impacts in the race. Switching one man from 5 to 6th and quite possibly snatching the green jersey right off Robbies back.

From cyclingnews.com:

Cyclingnews spoke to Gerolsteiner's Levi Leipheimer after the 2005 Tour de France, where he was ticked off to lose his 5th place on GC (effectively €19,000 in prizemoney) to crazy Kazakhi Alexandre Vinokourov, who moved ahead of Levi after gaining 0'20 from the stage win time bonus yesterday in Paris. But Leipheimer, like many riders in the peloton, was informed that because the slippery final circuits of the Champs Elysées were neutralized by the race officials, no time bonuses would be awarded at the finish. "That's what we heard from our team, that the circuits were neutralized and no time bonuses would be awarded. It was a big surprise to me," he said.

Thanks... that was exactly what I was referring to in my post above. Note that MANY of the riders thought the same thing. No time bonuses should have been given due to the circumstances.

Following wheels for 21 days vs attacking day in day out and taking the race by the scruff of the neck on the last day. Vino was far more deserving of 5th place in my book.


So.... how often did Armstrong attack? He seemed pretty content to sit on the wheels of his team for the duration of the tour. Winning the tour is about CONSISTANCY not attacking. I think Armstrong is the perfect example of that.

Look at Peirero. He got most aggressive rider. He like Vinokourov attacked numerous times but look at their standings overall in the GC. Hmmmm... I don't believe either wore the yellow jersey either...

So.... how often did Armstrong attack? He seemed pretty content to sit on the wheels of his team for the duration of the tour. Winning the tour is about CONSISTANCY not attacking. I think Armstrong is the perfect example of that.



No, winning the tour is about have the lowest accumulative time over all the stages. :D
How you go about doing that is completely incidental. Arguing consistancy vs aggressiveness is only stating an opinion. I personally would much rather watch Vino attacking like a mad dog than watch Leipheimer ride along waiting for the 6 riders above him on GC have a bad day.

Armstrong has won Tours by being aggressive and he has won by covering the moves. He put the work in at the front when required this year. The difference this year to previous years was that he didn't ride solo to any stage finishes as he couldn't unload a couple of guys.

No, winning the tour is about have the lowest accumulative time over all the stages. :D
How you go about doing that is completely incidental. Arguing consistancy vs aggressiveness is only stating an opinion. I personally would much rather watch Vino attacking like a mad dog than watch Leipheimer ride along waiting for the 6 riders above him on GC have a bad day.

Armstrong has won Tours by being aggressive and he has won by covering the moves. He put the work in at the front when required this year. The difference this year to previous years was that he didn't ride solo to any stage finishes as he couldn't unload a couple of guys.

Sure it is fun to watch but is it the best strategy???

This came in the RoadbikeRider.com Newsletter today:

It's simple. Lance commented on the strategy he and his Discovery Channel team director used to capture a 7th consecutive victory:

"You see many riders who attack all the time. Johann and I were sitting down and said, you know how many attacks it takes to win the Tour de France? One. One attack, and two good time trials. We stuck with that, and it worked."

Game plan: stage 1's 19-km time trial; stage 10's mountaintop finish at Courchevel; stage 20's 55-km time trial. Result: Lance finished 2nd, 2nd and 1st in those stages to take all the time he needed.

What do you think?

Following wheels for 21 days vs attacking day in day out and taking the race by the scruff of the neck on the last day. Vino was far more deserving of 5th place in my book.

OTOH, Vino got 5th place primarily because Disco let him go out on a break. Take away stage 11 and Levi gets fifth place by over a minute.

I agree, it's more fun to watch Vino, but I wouldn't say he was "far more deserving".

-murray

The only reason given for stopping the time at the entrance to the finishing circuit was to neutralized the race to prevent racing in unsafe conditions. Then the race officials say the bonuses for the finish still stand.

duh! If you are neutralizing to make the race safe, how can you still promote the race at the finish by allowing time bonuses?

:)
Sure it is fun to watch but is it the best strategy???

This came in the RoadbikeRider.com Newsletter today:

It's simple. Lance commented on the strategy he and his Discovery Channel team director used to capture a 7th consecutive victory:

"You see many riders who attack all the time. Johann and I were sitting down and said, you know how many attacks it takes to win the Tour de France? One. One attack, and two good time trials. We stuck with that, and it worked."

Game plan: stage 1's 19-km time trial; stage 10's mountaintop finish at Courchevel; stage 20's 55-km time trial. Result: Lance finished 2nd, 2nd and 1st in those stages to take all the time he needed.

What do you think?

I think Armstrong won because he was the strongest. :D

LA attacks at crucial points. He may have attacked once this year, but in previous years he has gapped the opposition on more than one occassion.

Th original point was Leipheimer vs Vino.

Leipheimer never attacks in the Tour, he follows wheels. I like Vinos style. He is willing to risk all to get a big result, and judges the best times to attack, which is why I believe he deserved fifth over Leipheimer.

The good thing about cycling is that it is so unpredictable. Different riders base their strategy around their strengths, the weather can dicate changes to plans and blow the race apart (remember Pantani in 98), and other riders strategies cause rethinks to gameplans.