Tour de France 2013 *spoilers*

[deptfordmarmoset]

Naughty Cav.

 

[thom]

I think this time Cav will have to offer a humble apology to Degenkolb there - he clearly knocked him off.
Well done Kittel.

 

[smutchin]

Yes, well done Kittel.

Was that Cav's fault? Hard to tell.

 

[kedab]

Naughty Cav.

they were my exact words

 

[Strathlubnaig]

Nice sprint from Kittel, solid win. Cavendish definitely shouldered Veelers out the way though, he cut over to the left a long way, accidental but careless.

 

[kedab]

Yes, well done Kittel.

Was that Cav's fault? Hard to tell.

i think it was, he appeared to give him a proper shoulder barge as he went past...it's hard to tell why, i'm sure cav will clear it up.

 

[Andy_R]

Naughty Cav.

He's not the messiah........

 

[Strathlubnaig]

Is he keeping la Manche up his sleeve?

a bit better than the eurosport guy, he called it the North Sea.

 

[dragon72]

No way was that accidental. It was a retaliation. Silly stuff from Cav.

 

[tigger]

That was a mess. OPQS bullied out of the way and it was game over with 1.7km to go. Strange finish really with the line only 100 metres past a near 90 degree bend. Cav gave Veelers a good shoulder barge didn't he? I wonder if there will be some ramifications?

 

[thom]

Yes, well done Kittel.

Was that Cav's fault? Hard to tell.

so when you look at it, Veelers looked like he was there to protect Kittel's wheel and be of an amount of obstruction.
Cav might get away with it but it is not ideal for him to have got mixed up there.

 

[smutchin]

What annoys me about the SIS guys is that they acknowledge this on the one hand, but then go on to say that if it was 6.5 w/kg ''I would be calling shenanigans for sure''. That's going from plausible to cheat within self-confessed error boundary on power estimate alone.

I take your point but I thought it was a reasonable comment in the context of everything else they say.

You know, picking on one line from the whole piece to destroy their argument is a bit like calling foul based on the evidence of one climb from a whole three week tour.

 

[Strathlubnaig]

To be fair, the article linked to by FM does cover that and advises caution when interpreting the data. It also makes the point that you can't draw firm conclusions from one-off performances like Saturday, you have to look at the bigger picture for the context.




Indeed. I'm working on the assumption that the peloton isn't 100% clean, purely on balance of probabilities, but there's no evidence as far as I can see to point the finger at any individual yet - although Cunego was named on the Mantova hitlist.



Surely the method is sound, it's just the data that's shaky? There's a bit more substance to the SIS analysis than pub chit chat though.

it is certainly a fairly concise and so far the most analytical of all studies, and they make sure to highlight the weaknesses of any such analysis etc, however, as a one off climb and looking at times, both Froome and Portes ascent are in the suspicous zone, only Armstrong has gone faster, and that was just the one time. Armstrongs other ascents were slower. No conclusion can be drawn, yet.

 

[Hip Priest]

That was a mess. OPQS bullied out of the way and it was game over with 1.7km to go. Strange finish really with the line only 100 metres past a near 90 degree bend. Cav gave Veelers a good shoulder barge didn't he? I wonder if there will be some ramifications?

He just seemed to be trying to follow Griepel's wheel. Careless rather than malicious. I imagine he'll apologise to Veelers and it'll blow over.

 

[smutchin]

Cav gave Veelers a good shoulder barge didn't he?

Yes, but in response to Veelers moving over towards his line. I call it 50:50, and Veelers was unlucky to come off worse.