Stage 8 - Sunday, July 11 2010, Station des Rousses - Morzine-Avoriaz

ednwireland

so he was struggling

"Alberto probably wanted to win the stage today. He's a little bit disappointed. He struggled to breathe in the final climb," said Sanquer. Contador confirmed that his breathing wasn't as good as usual.

"Everybody has seen that our Astana team rode at the front all the time," said Contador. "The headwind affected us in the finale. The team has been extraordinary and has done a great work."

Complimenting one of his top rivals and the day's stage winner, Contador said, "Andy Schleck has done really well. He's a rider who caused me some troubles last year as well. He surprised me when he started sprinting, so I decided to wait a little bit for the other riders, who were coming from behind. I've lost a few seconds but I felt good."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/contador-satisfied-with-first-mountain-stage

Brian?

me@ucd wrote: »

tbh after seeing contador's dauphine Alpe dhuez performance I started to wonder the same about him, he was known for having a savage kick [litteral sense not wicklow lingo:p ] but that seems to have gone this year and he is alot more 'human' now - he couldnt hold schlecks wheel or get on it even, nevermind drop Janni B on alpe dhuez despite trying dozens of times

Didn't Contador have the flu in the week before the Tour started? He might still be feeling the effects of it a little. Its not as if he got dropped half way down the climb and lost minutes, he lost 10 seconds.

He wasn't in peak condition in the Dauphine, it was a prep race for the tour. That explains his lack of kick in that race.

Edit: He probably won't take yellow tomorrow actually, Schleck will.

There's good chance he'll take yellow tomorrow. The Col de Madeleine has a way of sorting things out.

titan18

Something,I noticed watching highlights again this morning is that Chris Horner had a fantastic ride.He started the last climb at 2 minutes down on the main group, and finished 4 down on them despite having to ride by himself the whole way up, and just after doing domestique work for Lance.I'd say he'd definately would have finished with the favourites if he hadn't been called back for Lance

on_the_nickel

titan18 wrote: »

Something,I noticed watching highlights again this morning is that Chris Horner had a fantastic ride.He started the last climb at 2 minutes down on the main group, and finished 4 down on them despite having to ride by himself the whole way up, and just after doing domestique work for Lance.I'd say he'd definately would have finished with the favourites if he hadn't been called back for Lance

Does anyone know of any footage online of Armstrong getting dropped? Missed it yesterday and wanted to see it.

Just spent 20 minutes on youtube with no joy.

cantalach

on_the_nickel wrote: »

Does anyone know of any footage online of Armstrong getting dropped? Missed it yesterday and wanted to see it.

Just spent 20 minutes on youtube with no joy.

See www.cyclingtorrents.nl for all your cycling video needs.

ednwireland

on_the_nickel wrote: »

Does anyone know of any footage online of Armstrong getting dropped? Missed it yesterday and wanted to see it.

Just spent 20 minutes on youtube with no joy.

he didnt really get dropped, never got back on after the crashes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcyjge8onvw
and if that really is lance sliding down the road on his back :eek:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHBftK8okyA

on_the_nickel

He got back on after that didn't he? Then just slid out the back of the main favourites group...

niceonetom

He very definitely got dropped.

I'm sure the lancefans will try to rewrite the last moments of his career into into a story of bad luck rather than (the truth) weakness though.

Lumen

on_the_nickel wrote: »

He got back on after that didn't he? Then just slid out the back of the main favourites group...

As I recall, he got back just before the penultimate climb, was dropped on that climb then crashed (lightly) at the feed station at the top, before the descent to the final climb.

There was an awful lot of this going on in my living room yesterday.

kennyb3

on_the_nickel wrote: »

He got back on after that didn't he? Then just slid out the back of the main favourites group...

yeah he did get back on after the 2nd crash of 3, then cracked. he was then held up by a crash (didnt fall) and after a bit of trying gave up and accepted it. he just didnt have the legs or lungs

Edit: what lumen said (im too slow -damn mods and their keyboard abilities)

ednwireland

there you go dropped on the col de ramaz
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/490720/tour-de-france-2010-video-stage-8-highlights.html

2.14 in on that vid (very brief glimpse)

Moflojo

niceonetom wrote: »

He very definitely got dropped.

I'm sure the lancefans will try to rewrite the last moments of his career into into a story of bad luck rather than (the truth) weakness though.

Come on dude, doping or not doping aside, the guy has to be respected for not packing it all in yesterday considering the horrible week he has had on the bike.

The worst thing about the whole LA debate is how polarised the two sides are. His detractors can't seem to acknowledge any of his qualities while his fans seem unable to admit that he has any flaws.

The guy is nearly 39 years old, he has taken an absolute hammering this week, but he still crossed the finish line yesterday. Chapeau, I say.

on_the_nickel

ednwireland wrote: »

there you go dropped on the col de ramaz
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/490720/tour-de-france-2010-video-stage-8-highlights.html

2.14 in on that vid (very brief glimpse)

Thanks, I'd just found that one myself! Still looking for that precise moment where he cracks. :rolleyes:

Lumen

Moflojo wrote: »

The worst thing about the whole LA debate is how polarised the two sides are. His detractors can't seem to acknowledge any of his qualities while his fans seem unable to admit that he has any flaws.

Why do you feel it is necessary for there to be consensus?

kennyb3

Moflojo wrote: »

Come on dude, doping or not doping aside, the guy has to be respected for not packing it all in yesterday considering the horrible week he has had on the bike.

The worst thing about the whole LA debate is how polarised the two sides are. His detractors can't seem to acknowledge any of his qualities while his fans seem unable to admit that he has any flaws.

The guy is nearly 39 years old, he has taken an absolute hammering this week, but he still crossed the finish line yesterday. Chapeau, I say.

There is a long list of other cyclist who dont pack it in day in day out who suffer worse and i dont see anyone coming on here and saluting them.

Just look at O'grady this week, how he finished the stage after hitting the journo god knows.

I would imagine a big part of lance not quitting is the team sponsors.

On the otherside i could flip the coin over and say why did he not make any more of an effort and only roll home? and he looked like a big spoilt brat peering over the other rider when he was held up in the 3rd crash.

Moflojo

kennyb3 wrote: »

and he looked like a big spoilt brat peering over the other rider when he was held up in the 3rd crash.

I always marvel at the psychological prowess of many of the Lance detractors who seem to know exactly what evil thoughts are running through the guy's mind.

His reaction to the 3rd crash was really odd though, I know I'd have been cracking ironic humourisms if I'd just had my 3rd crash of the day and seen all my hopes of winning a race go out the window.

Moflojo

Lumen wrote: »

Why do you feel it is necessary for there to be consensus?

I don't think that was what I was getting at at all Lumen. Consensus isn't possible in this debate, but there seem to be very few, if any, people willing to take the middle ground.

kennyb3

Moflojo wrote: »

I always marvel at the psychological prowess of many of the Lance detractors who seem to know exactly what evil thoughts are running through the guy's mind.

His reaction to the 3rd crash was really odd though, I know I'd have been cracking ironic humourisms if I'd just had my 3rd crash of the day and seen all my hopes of winning a race go out the window.

I do not pretend to know what goes on in his head but just gave my opinion/observation based on his body language. TBH im sure deep down he was only so annoyed as to his own lack of legs:)

Lumen

Moflojo wrote: »

I don't think that was what I was getting at at all Lumen. Consensus isn't possible in this debate, but there seem to be very few, if any, people willing to take the middle ground.

What's the middle ground? Either he lied and cheated or he didn't.

I personally think he is an amazing athlete, but I don't see why I should be forced to append that praise to every unproven slur I care to make in order to achieve balance.

ROK ON

It will be fascinating to see LA's blood values for this tour versus prior tours.

ednwireland

ROK ON wrote: »

It will be fascinating to see LA's blood values for this tour versus prior tours.

now you know thats never gonna happen

Moflojo

Lumen wrote: »

What's the middle ground? Either he lied and cheated or he didn't.

I personally think he is an amazing athlete, but I don't see why I should be forced to append that praise to every unproven slur I care to make in order to achieve balance.

If everything were as black and white as "he lied and cheated or he didn't" then there probably wouldn't be any debate over this at all. I don't condone cheating, but I refuse to condemn a man without knowing the exact circumstances of his alleged misdemeanors.

By the way, how the hell did you become a mod? Did you collect tokens on the back of Rice Krispies boxes?

'Do as I say, not as I do.'

Lumen

Moflojo wrote: »

By the way, how the hell did you become a mod? Did you collect tokens on the back of Rice Krispies boxes?

No, I was directly elected at the eighth annual convention of the Lance Haters Association.

kennyb3

Moflojo wrote: »

If everything were as black and white as "he lied and cheated or he didn't" then there probably wouldn't be any debate over this at all. I don't condone cheating, but I refuse to condemn a man without knowing the exact circumstances of his alleged misdemeanors.

By the way, how the hell did you become a mod? Did you collect tokens on the back of Rice Krispies boxes?

'Do as I say, not as I do.'

i suppose you think lance has a sparkling personality too?

mcgratheoin

Moflojo wrote:

If everything were as black and white as "he lied and cheated or he didn't" then there probably wouldn't be any debate over this at all.

It is that black and white - that's exactly what the debate is "did he lie and cheat or didn't he".

Moflojo wrote:

I don't condone cheating, but I refuse to condemn a man without knowing the exact circumstances of his alleged misdemeanors.

You should also refuse to praise him if you can't be bothered to find out about his alleged misdemeanors so.

Moflojo

I think my point about the polar nature of the LA debate has been proven here.

I've tried to be objective in all of my posts on the topic but the anti-Lance camp seem to believe that anything other than utter contempt for Lance Armstrong makes a person a Lance-lover.

I guess trying to take the middle ground in this debate only results in getting pulverised by both sides. This should be a demilitarised zone, like the Koreans have, a no-go area of sorts. It's not safe there.

hinault

Moflojo wrote: »

Come on dude, doping or not doping aside, the guy has to be respected for not packing it all in yesterday considering the horrible week he has had on the bike.

The worst thing about the whole LA debate is how polarised the two sides are. His detractors can't seem to acknowledge any of his qualities while his fans seem unable to admit that he has any flaws.

The guy is nearly 39 years old, he has taken an absolute hammering this week, but he still crossed the finish line yesterday. Chapeau, I say.

he cracked badly yesterday.
I said it on another forum last week that in my opinion, LA would be found out in this TDF and thus it has been proven.

He's 39yo.
No shame in cracking in a GT.

mcgratheoin

Moflojo wrote: »

I've tried to be objective in all of my posts on the topic but the anti-Lance camp seem to believe that anything other than utter contempt for Lance Armstrong makes a person a Lance-lover.

That's not exactly true. The way the Lance debate works is as follows;
LA has been dogged by rumours and accusations of doping for many years. When discussing his career it is the first issue that must be dealt with. It is a black and white issue - either he did or he didn't. Without addressing this particular issue, it is impossible to analyse any of his achievements in a meaningful fashion.

In my opinion, what you call the middle ground/demilitarised zone, I call the head-in-the-sand zone. By just talking about his chances this year, and his current performances versus his previous performances, nobody's addressing the elephant in the room.

kerryscoob

Talk about suffering, a days break, powers of recovery,I fear for him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cat_sjzFIO0&feature=channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUXuvrLIy6o&feature=channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F1_bllJ7jQ&feature=channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93iBJLRBnes&feature=channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvd5bnLTqMY&feature=channel

uberwolf

chrisbonnie wrote: »

school boy error perhaps?

in his defence it's easy to do in the mountains and heat - you either get food into you at exactly the right time or it's too close to the next climb.
I recall Armstrong bonking one day trying to follow Pantani across a few mountains. He went on to win that tour - and he was reknowned for his attention to detail.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfLQVNavI8Q

snuck past tense in to describe Armstrong, just trying it out