Tour de France 2016 **SPOILERS**

[Pro Tour Punditry]

Article saying Froome was abusing the YJ by slowing the peloton so that his team mates could catch up, and that that Movistar missed a tactical trick by failing to press their advantage at this point.

Froome’s abuse of yellow was Movistar’s missed opportunity

I have no opinion on this either way. When I saw on the TdF ticker that the peloton had slowed to let the Sky domestiques catch up I did think it odd, but there are so many unwritten rules that I don't pretend (or try) to understand.

I find a lot of things in life a bit odd, and most of them are normal.

Cancellara is a hand-waving nobber; he has history of these things - remember the slidy road from a few years ago and also a stage earlier this year? He has used his self-appointed "patron" status to ill-effect; let people decide for themselves whether they want to race or sit about waiting. I have enjoyed seeing Cancellara race over the years, but I reckon he's just a nobber.

I'd have loved to have heard (I only managed to catch the last 10km) that Valverde had attacked and others had gone with him, putting Froome under pressure. it's become a bit of a controlled event. Obviously some things are beyond their control, as seen yesterday near the end, but even then it's "controlled" to redress the balance in the favour of "fair play/what would have been" rather than accepting misfortune and uncertainty - the race would be much more interesting for permitting attacks and accepting misfortune as part of racing.

 

[HF2300]

Article saying Froome was abusing the YJ by slowing the peloton so that his team mates could catch up, and that that Movistar missed a tactical trick by failing to press their advantage at this point.

Froome’s abuse of yellow was Movistar’s missed opportunity.

Think there are three issues with this. First, the writer portrays it as "waiting for and protecting his loyal domestiques" - but of the two that went down, only one was Sky; the guy that precipitated the crash was Gerrans of OBE working for Yates. It looks much more like fellow feeling among cyclists. Second, Movistar had, by my count, only two or three riders apart from Quintana; so had they pressed on, they might well have used up their support trying to stretch things out on the flat, risking insufficient support on Ventoux. Third, had Movistar attacked, it's likely that Froome would have pressed on without Stannard to reel Movistar back in; with Sky's superior numbers in that group, it's likely they'd have done it and had support left for Ventoux that Movistar didn't have. To suggest Froome abused the power of the yellow jersey is just silly.

 

[suzeworld]

Article saying Froome was abusing the YJ by slowing the peloton so that his team mates could catch up, and that that Movistar missed a tactical trick by failing to press their advantage at this point.

Froome’s abuse of yellow was Movistar’s missed opportunity

I have no opinion on this either way.

Interesting read ...
Froome is a master tactician .. if he wasn't hurt he had no business stopping, and maybe the others should have pressed on and called his bluff .. it is in these split second decisions that races are won and lost .. and placings too, as the article suggests.

I have got to say, Froome certainly had Quintana beat on Ventoux before his crash, but maybe he would have been less strong without his team for the kms before that? I am not sure though - Froome could have taken anyone's wheel up Ventoux. according to Millar you dont get so much benefit from draughting up climbs like that ..

 

[suzeworld]

Think there are three issues with this. First, the writer portrays it as "waiting for and protecting his loyal domestiques" - but of the two that went down, only one was Sky; the guy that precipitated the crash was Gerrans of OBE working for Yates. It looks much more like fellow feeling among cyclists. Second, Movistar had, by my count, only two or three riders apart from Quintana; so had they pressed on, they might well have used up their support trying to stretch things out on the flat, risking insufficient support on Ventoux. Third, had Movistar attacked, it's likely that Froome would have pressed on without Stannard to reel Movistar back in; with Sky's superior numbers in that group, it's likely they'd have done it and had support left for Ventoux that Movistar didn't have. To suggest Froome abused the power of the yellow jersey is just silly.

I like your analysis .. your eye for detail beats mine!

 

[Dogtrousers]

I'm loth to express an opinion on the rights and wrongs of the peloton's unwritten rules because I'm so far from understanding what it's like, but I do find them a bit frustrating. Just get on with it. Like all the hand wringing when Bertie attacked Schleck just as Schleck lost his chain. The problem with these "fairness" rules is that (to an outside observer) they just make things more unfair, because some incidents are compensated for (Froome's domestiques getting delayed by a crash) and some aren't (Porte punctures on Stage 2, Cavendish's mechanical day before yesterday). So it begins to look like a bit of a stitch up.

But the usual disclaimer applies: I am an idiot and my opinions are worthless.

 

[T4tomo]

In line with your spirit of truth and reconciliation, may I admit that I did not ride alongside Hinault and Lemond in the La Vie Claire team. I apologise to those whom I may have mislead.

I'll admit to being your fellow non teammate in La Vie Clare too. Lovely shirt (and socks and gloves) though.

 

[mjr]

Somewhere in all the coverage (sorry!) is a comment that the organisation has already started preliminary setup on top of Ventoux, including barrier delivery. After the decision to shorten the stage, they were unable to retrieve all the barriers in time along with all else they were doing, such as setting up the Technical Zone 30km away in a supermarket carpark.

I guess they didn't think anyone would be such a nobber as to block the race.

 

[smutchin]

I guess they didn't think anyone would be such a nobber as to block the race.

Have they never watched the Tour de France before?

 

[Aravis]

I've never felt comfortable with the "don't take advantage of the yellow jersey's misfortune" convention, not because it's a bad thing in itself but because giving the jersey special status unbalances the competition. The clearest example I can remember is Van Impe on Alpe d'Huez in 1977. I don't think he was virtual leader when the incident took place, but he certainly was for part of the climb. What happened was deeply unsatisfactory and it would have been played out completely differently had he been in the jersey.

So if there's going to be a convention where a particular rider is protected against losing his chance through misfortune, I'd prefer to see it extended to include all GC contenders (no idea how you define that). Or just say that racing incidents are racing incidents, and non-racing incidents like yesterday's will be dealt with by the organisers as appropriate. On balance I think I prefer the latter.

Regarding Froome and his domestiques yesterday, I think he probably did pull a fast one.

 

[Crandoggler]

I guess it's like kicking the ball out of play when a teammate is down, but the ref hasn't blown his whistle. Frustrating, but that's the name of the game. They want all their team alongside them.

 

[mjr]

Interesting suggestion on the ITV podcast by David Millar, that the neutral service car should carry four bikes set up for the top four GC riders. He acknowledges it would privilege GC leaders, but things already do (I guess he means things like team car ordering). It probably won't happen due to sponsorships, but the current situation already makes neutral service sponsors look rubbish.

 

[Elybazza61]

It does seem a bit strange that they didn't move the barriers further down the climb as they had made the descition to shorten the stage the day before.

De Gent mentioned that he was surprised the barriers started so close to the finish.

Also don't see how they can give Quintana the same time as Mollema,Ritchie and Chris;with the data they have now surely they could make a note of the gaps before the incident and just apply them.

 

[Elybazza61]

Interesting suggestion on the ITV podcast by David Millar, that the neutral service car should carry four bikes set up for the top four GC riders. He acknowledges it would privilege GC leaders, but things already do (I guess he means things like team car ordering). It probably won't happen due to sponsorships, but the current situation already makes neutral service sponsors look rubbish.

It does seem bizzare that the neutral service bikes don't have bikes with different pedals on them;I would have thought that they would have standard size bikes with shimano,look,time etc pedals on with long seat posts so they can cover most circumstances.

 

[HF2300]

Also don't see how they can give Quintana the same time as Mollema,Ritchie and Chris;with the data they have now surely they could make a note of the gaps before the incident and just apply them.

They didn't, they gave him the same time as Yates, according to Bruno Valcic.

 

[jarlrmai]

The convention is because of the riders, no-one wants to be the man who only won the yellow jersey because of someone else's technical problem.