Originally Posted by McSpin

Actually, in this instance, hindsight is 20/300. We don't know what would have happened no matter what the tactic chosen. Landis may have increased his winning margin greatly if they had chosen to attach hard at an earlier point.



Actually, probably not. I saw nothing and have read nothing from another rider that gave me the impression that they could have reeled him in. For every ride who sat in the back hoping to follow others on an all-out chase, there are three that say that an early, hard chase up those mountains would have blown them apart.

____________________________________________





Are you implying there are riders who said that Landis was no better than a good climber on that day? Every single quote I've seen from another rider, suggested that Landis was unbelievably strong that day. I saw nothing in Rasumssen's ride that indicated he was anywhere near as strong as Landis. He was behind 3 times as much as Landis and can't time trial worth crap. He also lost huge chunks of time on the last climb to many riders. Landis lost time on his last climb to two riders. How you can possibly rate the ride by Rasumssen to be as good as Landis', is beyond me.

Sure, but no rider who actually tried to break with Landis, said that. Same with any of the riders in the initial breaking group, which Landis had to cover a 10 minute gap to catch. They should have easily grabbed his wheel, but only one could, and barely at that. The GC group had an organized chase at the bottom of the last climb and only two didn't lose additional time on Landis. If they chased earlier, those two would have had no help at the bottom of the last time and would most likely have also lost time on that climb.

In any chasing group, there are always those who think another tactic should have been taken or that someone should have gone earlier or later. That doesn't mean they were right, just that in hindsight they wished it had gone differently, which MAY have helped them.