# Landis' mechanicals



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

one mechanical just before prologue. Luckily didn't cost him much. Another two mechanicals today. What is going on? His result is impressive, but preparation?


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

55x11 said:


> one mechanical just before prologue. Luckily didn't cost him much. Another two mechanicals today. What is going on? His result is impressive, but preparation?



UCI screwed him over.. made him change his handle bar position last minute.. and then the handlebars cracked.. (oln reported)


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

bas said:


> UCI screwed him over.. made him change his handle bar position last minute.. and then the handlebars cracked.. (oln reported)


I heart UCi:incazzato::incazzato::incazzato:


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

bas said:


> UCI screwed him over.. made him change his handle bar position last minute.. and then the handlebars cracked.. (oln reported)


If true that is definitley par for the course. Gets inspected all year and okay'd with that position then screw him over at the most important time in his career.


----------



## Coot72 (Nov 11, 2002)

*Lame UCI*

Stupid Eurocentrists!


----------



## Mocat4 (Jul 7, 2006)

bas said:


> UCI screwed him over.. made him change his handle bar position last minute.. and then the handlebars cracked.. (oln reported)


They were probably watching Floyd's coach on OLN this morning talking about how Floyd can "barely see where he is going" when he uses those bars. Doesn't exactly sound safe! 
Of course, in true UCI fashion they wait til the last minute when it is most detrimental to the rider to make the call! :mad2:


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2006)

Bozos - the animals have taken over the zoo.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

Well, not to take UCI side, but what do you expect if you are essentially pushing the boundaries of what is "legal"? It was discussed previously here, and in many photos Landis' position is clearly in violation of UCI rules. I wouldn't be surprised if in constant tinkering in search of a better position Landis and Ventura tried to cross that line - maybe inadvertently.

This was always a risk with attempting that position, and Landis knew it all along.

Frankly, I am a little surprised he wasn't called on it earlier, as he can barely steer riding like that. I am sure others will disagree...


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

It seems rather ridiculous for the UCI to jerk any rider around like that. It's not like they hadn't approved his setup/position up to this point. It's a good thing he didn't crash out when his new setup failed. I wonder if his backup bike was in compliance? Anyway, if he could stay composed and still turn that kind of performance it would seem he's the man this year barring a catastrophe. ...like the UCI pulling another move like that. It's early still so I wouldn't bet on Landis yet though. ...on the other hand I would bet against Gonchar's GC chances for sure because he doesn't have chance in the mountains unless he's on the top shelf dope.


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

55x11 said:


> as he can barely steer riding like that.


And you know this how?


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2006)

That's the point - why didn't they do something about it earlier? Instead of telling Phonak shortly b/4 Landis had to ride - talk about messing with a riders head. Landis is one cool dude to pull off the ride he did with all the problems he had.


----------



## stcanard (Aug 4, 2005)

55x11 said:


> Well, not to take UCI side, but what do you expect if you are essentially pushing the boundaries of what is "legal"?


I would expect them to mention it 6 months ago. Or yesterday. Or pretty much anything except minutes before you are about to start, forcing you to make an untested modification to the setup.

If anything its the UCI that should be taken to task for creating a dangerous situation, by suddenly forcing an untested setup.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

AJL said:


> That's the point - why didn't they do something about it earlier? Instead of telling Phonak shortly b/4 Landis had to ride - talk about messing with a riders head. Landis is one cool dude to pull off the ride he did with all the problems he had.


I completely agree. These things should be approved well ahead of time. As long as Landis & Co didn't try to change something recently, they should file a complaint. I am sure we will hear about it.

But they knew they were exposing themselves to this kind of calls from officials. They are in a very grey territory as far as I am concerned.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

rocco said:


> on the other hand I would bet against Gonchar's GC chances for sure because he doesn't have chance in the mountains unless he's on the top shelf dope.


look up "Giro 2004". While he can't climb with the likes of Simoni or Cunego, he can minimize his losses.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

stcanard said:


> I would expect them to mention it 6 months ago. Or yesterday. Or pretty much anything except minutes before you are about to start, forcing you to make an untested modification to the setup.
> 
> If anything its the UCI that should be taken to task for creating a dangerous situation, by suddenly forcing an untested setup.



It seems the inspection procedure needs to be re-evaluated. I wonder if the officials do their technical inspections minutes before the start of F1 races? I would think the morning of the race and hours before the start is the latest they should do such inspections.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

OnTheRivet said:


> And you know this how?


ever tried driving your car with your elbows? Do the dishes? Vacuum your carpet? I haven't either, that's because I know it would not end well. 

Landis can't have much of control over his bike steering with his elbows - most people including himself and his coach attest to that. Superman position may provide more control than that.

UCI calls may be arbitrary, but they didn't pick on anyone else for a reason - Landis exposed himself to UCI's calls by going borderline legal.


----------



## stcanard (Aug 4, 2005)

rocco said:


> It seems the inspection procedure needs to be revaluated. I wonder if the officials do their technical inspections minutes before the start of F1 races? I would think the morning of the race and hours before the start is the latest they should do such inspections.


I agree. It would also be interesting to see the criteria -- they keep going on about how this position was developed in the wind tunnel. Given how much difference even millimeteres of position make, I would be very surprised if Floyd & crew have changed the position since the prologue.

So how does it pass on the prologue and fail on this time trial? Is it a relatively arbitrary decsion based on who's looking at it today, and 2 weeks from now the bike will pass again, or maybe even the modified backup will fail?

[Edit] Before someone points out the obvious, I know there is a codified set of 'rules' from the UCI -- but this situation points out that those 'rules' aren't interpreted the same all the time, or else Floyd's bike would have been changed quite some time ago...


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

55x11 said:


> look up "Giro 2004". While he can't climb with the likes of Simoni or Cunego, he can minimize his losses.



Perhaps, but lets see here... He just turned 36, that was 2 years ago, he lost tons of time in the mountians in this year's Giro... and that's Giro, not the Tour. We'll see.


----------



## Mocat4 (Jul 7, 2006)

If we look at Floyd's and Levi's position side by side it appears as if their elbows are in pretty similair positions in relation to the bar. I wonder if it's the position of Floyd's hands that the UCI objected to, given that they're blocking his line of sight. His hands are also that much farther away from the brakes, another safety issue.

What do you guys think?


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 2001)

yeah, landis was robbed. They stole time off him by forcing him to change last minute.

The higher bar position was the result of their wind tunnel testing this year. Aside from the mechanical, it affects Landis' confidence, output, etc since he's been training in that position all year.

fc


----------



## Argentius (Aug 26, 2004)

OnTheRivet said:


> And you know this how?


Even Floyd says so. He says it's not very comfortable and you can't steer for crap, but wind tunnels say it's faster.


----------



## DSR (Oct 10, 2002)

Makes sense. Side by side FLs position looks faster. The more traditional LL position leaves much more face and chest exposed, while Floyd's appears to block airflow from getting inside him. That's just some armchair aeronautics though...  

UCI ruling seems bogus. If he's out of spec, then ban it at the beginning of the season or Tour, not minutes before the second ITT. But it's also kinda par for the course for European refereeing (word?) - just look at the World Cup! S


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2006)

Conspiracy theories abound.

You guys need to step back and read what you're typing.

Every single team, rider and bike in the Peloton is subject to the exact same rules, weights, measurements.

Every single bike and rider is subject to random testing to determine that the rules are being followed.

Does anyone remember bikes having weights glued onto the top tube because they didn't minimum weight limits?

If the team, the mechanics or the rider have made any tweaks to a bike that take it outside the UCI prescribed regulations, it will be dq'd unless fixed.

Landis' problem today is not the UCI's fault. It is either the team, a mechanic or the rider who have set the bike up outside the rules. Black and White. Not a conspiracy.

As to the handlebars breaking. Remember Phonak's TTT a couple of years ago? 5 handlebars broken.

Carbon bars can break, if they broke here it is either a manufacturer's defect or a mechanic's F/up.

No black helicopters involved, sorry.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

toomanybikes said:


> Conspiracy theories abound.
> 
> You guys need to step back and read what you're typing.
> 
> ...


Yeah having a bike that meets the UCI stringent TT regulations (and not running easy flat TT tires) is Phonak's management and mechanics responsibility. Which they failed at again, between all the suspnsions the last three years, and the rinky dink equipment issues, they are proving to be a second rate team. This may explain why Floyd has not re-signed with them yet (his contract is up at the end of the year- think he is getting some big offers. . . .)


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

toomanybikes said:


> Conspiracy theories abound.
> 
> You guys need to step back and read what you're typing.
> 
> ...



His bike was inspected numerous times leading up to this TT and passed, then suddenly it fails. If nothing has changed how can this be the teams fault?


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2006)

OnTheRivet said:


> His bike was inspected numerous times leading up to this TT and passed, then suddenly it fails. If nothing has changed how can this be the teams fault?



What do tyou mean nothing has changed. The bike is stripped down, cleaned and rebuilt after every use. It is "serviced" before every use.

There is ample opportunity for the team or a mechanic to tweak the bike at any stage.

They roll the dice and assume that since they were tested at the Giro, they won't get picked here. They rolled craps.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

deleted - dupe


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

toomanybikes said:


> What do tyou mean nothing has changed. The bike is stripped down, cleaned and rebuilt after every use. It is "serviced" before every use.
> 
> There is ample opportunity for the team or a mechanic to tweak the bike at any stage.
> 
> They roll the dice and assume that since they were tested at the Giro, they won't get picked here. They rolled craps.



Assuming they actually changed something either accidentally or intentionally... see you're making as much of a assumption as everyone else here.


----------



## dlbcx (Aug 28, 2002)

May have been another team DS that went to the UCI officials and complained about Landis' bike.


----------



## Mocat4 (Jul 7, 2006)

Has any source (other than Bob Roll on OLN) reported that Floyd had an issue with the UCI? All of the cycling and/or news sites that I've read mention that Floyd had a flat on the course and had to change his bike, there's been no mention of changing his bike because of a UCI ruling or a loose handlebar. Has anyone seen this reported elsewhere?


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

Mocat4 said:


> Has any source (other than Bob Roll on OLN) reported that Floyd had an issue with the UCI? All of the cycling and/or news sites that I've read mention that Floyd had a flat on the course and had to change his bike, there's been no mention of changing his bike because of a UCI ruling or a loose handlebar. Has anyone seen this reported elsewhere?


Velonews reports the handlebar problem, no mention of UCi interference...

http://velonews.com/tour2006/details/articles/10281.0.html


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

Mocat4 said:


> Has any source (other than Bob Roll on OLN) reported that Floyd had an issue with the UCI? All of the cycling and/or news sites that I've read mention that Floyd had a flat on the course and had to change his bike, there's been no mention of changing his bike because of a UCI ruling or a loose handlebar. Has anyone seen this reported elsewhere?



http://www.velonews.com/tour2006/details/articles/10281.0.html


----------



## magnolialover (Jun 2, 2004)

*According to Landis...*



dlbcx said:


> May have been another team DS that went to the UCI officials and complained about Landis' bike.


A handlebar problem forced Landis to change bikes during the stage, but he rode strongly to limit the damage and said afterward that he was pleased with his ride.

"I got beat fair and square," he said. "It looks good for the rest of the race, but there's a long way to go. We'll take it one day at a time."

From www.velonews.com 

It appears there was no UCI involvement with his bike pre race. No mention of it there, in Cyclingnews.com, Pezcyclingnews.com, procycling.com, or any other site out there. The UCI didn't fiddle with Landis' bike. He had a bar problem and got beat. Probably would have gotten beat even if the bar issue didn't arise, probably just wouldn't have lost as much.


----------



## dlbcx (Aug 28, 2002)

Handlebar problem...what a bummer but I gotta give it to Floyd since he didn't have a meltdown like Rasmussen! Guess Levi will be working for Totschnig. Levi must have gotten sick...I never thought Rujano would beat him in a TT!


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

*From the horses mouth, Phonak website.*

Landis complained about defective grips on the time-trial bike's handlebars. He had to switch bikes before the first intermediate time check. "I not only lost a lot of time as a result of that. I also had to find my racing rhythm again right away,"
No UCI involvement it seems.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

dlbcx said:


> Handlebar problem...what a bummer but I gotta give it to Floyd since he didn't have a meltdown like Rasmussen! Guess Levi will be working for Totschnig. Levi must have gotten sick...I never thought Rujano would beat him in a TT!



Totschnig is in 37th place on the GC so one would think Gerolsteiner will be working for Lang who is in 15th place.


----------



## Mike Gonyea (Jun 19, 2005)

*Prang Landis!*

Like praying Mantis, I always thougth tit was prang mantis when I was a kid. Sounds cooler! That is what that position looks like. He almost for sure would have won if they (or the bike had not failed) had not messed with him.


----------



## dlbcx (Aug 28, 2002)

OnTheRivet said:


> Landis complained about defective grips on the time-trial bike's handlebars. He had to switch bikes before the first intermediate time check. "I not only lost a lot of time as a result of that. I also had to find my racing rhythm again right away,"
> No UCI involvement it seems.


I went back on the Velonews site and found this:
http://www.velonews.com/tour2006/tech/articles/10296.0.html
Sounds like the UCI did make Phonak change the bar position but the bar broke when Landis hit bump. Landis said the break was similar to what Hincapie experienced at P-R so, luckily for Floyd, he didn't crash! Otherwise, there would have been two Americans who crashed today!


----------



## Mocat4 (Jul 7, 2006)

dlbcx said:


> I went back on the Velonews site and found this:
> http://www.velonews.com/tour2006/tech/articles/10296.0.html
> Sounds like the UCI did make Phonak change the bar position but the bar broke when Landis hit bump. Landis said the break was similar to what Hincapie experienced at P-R so, luckily for Floyd, he didn't crash! Otherwise, there would have been two Americans who crashed today!


Thanks for clearing this up guys! I knew Bob Roll probably had it right given his connection to Floyd's coach, but I was mystified as to why no one else seemed to be reporting on it. I see now that that has been rectified! 

Kudos to Floyd for keeping his cool throught this whole debacle and finishing in a fully respectable second! :thumbsup:


----------



## Mike Gonyea (Jun 19, 2005)

Landis the Mantis what a cool nick name. Sorry I wills shut up now ;o)


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 2001)

the bar angle on the prologue seems higher than the itt. If the uci forced that change last minute, then there is something wong.

regardless, floyd's mechanics should be fired.

how much time was lost on the bike change?? i suspect it's a bunch more than 10-15 seconds. One has to decelerate an build up speed and regain the rythm.

fc


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

francois said:


> the bar angle on the prologue seems higher than the itt. If the uci forced that change last minute, then there is something wong.
> 
> regardless, floyd's mechanics should be fired.
> 
> ...



It's hard to tell.. I don't have anything from the prologue...

But it looks like the same position he had while warming up...


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

These are pictures from the rider profile they did on him..

It doesn't look too far off.. but he might of had a more radical position with the bars.


----------



## wipeout (Jun 6, 2005)

Coot72 said:


> Stupid Eurocentrists!


I agree - The UCI should be ashamed of itself for pulling that crap at the last moment. Moreons.


----------



## CFBlue (Jun 28, 1999)

*It's really pretty simple*



AJL said:


> That's the point - why didn't they do something about it earlier? Instead of telling Phonak shortly b/4 Landis had to ride - talk about messing with a riders head. Landis is one cool dude to pull off the ride he did with all the problems he had.


If you check a bike in the morning, the rider can take it back to his mechanic and change it before the TT. If you check it just before the race, they can't change the position and side step the rules. 

the rider/team/mechanic is responsible for following the rules(They are clear enough but if there is any question then you need to clarify) It's not up to the UCI to check in on riders every so often to see if their latest position modification is acceptable.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

*What*

Your elbows are exactly what you steer with in aero bars - actually moet steering is done with your hips with very little bar movement on the bike except for very sharp/low speed turns.

As far as the rules the UCI has its head up its [email protected]@ and has for some time.



55x11 said:


> ever tried driving your car with your elbows? Do the dishes? Vacuum your carpet? I haven't either, that's because I know it would not end well.
> 
> Landis can't have much of control over his bike steering with his elbows - most people including himself and his coach attest to that. Superman position may provide more control than that.
> 
> UCI calls may be arbitrary, but they didn't pick on anyone else for a reason - Landis exposed himself to UCI's calls by going borderline legal.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2006)

hayaku said:


> If you check a bike in the morning, the rider can take it back to his mechanic and change it before the TT. If you check it just before the race, they can't change the position and side step the rules.
> 
> the rider/team/mechanic is responsible for following the rules(They are clear enough but if there is any question then you need to clarify) It's not up to the UCI to check in on riders every so often to see if their latest position modification is acceptable.



OK, that makes sense. I suppose that there is no other way to do it.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

bas said:


> These are pictures from the rider profile they did on him..
> 
> It doesn't look too far off.. but he might of had a more radical position with the bars.


The front of the bars is not supposed to be further than 15cm (I think that's the distance - but don't quote me on it) from front wheel's hub, to prevent "superman" position. In the last picture it looks like Landis may be over that, so I suspect this was the problem. I am sure mechanics, Landis, coaches know exactly what they are doing, perfectly aware of the rule and know how to use a measuring tape or a ruler. So either they were trying to sneak by the rules hoping UCI is not going to call them on it, or, which is much worse, they are incompetent and had no idea they were over the limit. I prefer to think they were "sneaky".

Either way in the end buck stops with mechanics and Landis himself, not with "evil" UCI.

So just because we are paranoid doesn't mean UCI is not out to get him!


----------



## mohair_chair (Oct 3, 2002)

Seems to me that Phonak knew they were on the edge of the rules and should have anticipated a UCI challenge. They could have already had a second bike set up that would pass, so they wouldn't have to panic. It's called being prepared. A team that really wants to win the TDF does not stumble when they are faced with obstacles. Can't really blame the UCI for Phonak's mechanical.


----------



## snowman3 (Jul 20, 2002)

mohair_chair said:


> Seems to me that Phonak knew they were on the edge of the rules and should have anticipated a UCI challenge. They could have already had a second bike set up that would pass, so they wouldn't have to panic. It's called being prepared. A team that really wants to win the TDF does not stumble when they are faced with obstacles. Can't really blame the UCI for Phonak's mechanical.


Another aspect is that floyd and phonak aren't raising a big stink. If they thought they were being hassled with ticky-tack fouls, I'm sure they would mention it or claim there are double standards for different riders.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

rocco said:


> Perhaps, but lets see here... He just turned 36, that was 2 years ago, he lost tons of time in the mountians in this year's Giro... and that's Giro, not the Tour. We'll see.


rocco,

I didn't want to say anything, but your doping drivel means someone has to call you on your crackpottery, it might as well be me.

You once again show off your ignorance - clearly you have not followed this year's Giro: First of all, Honchar/Gontchar badly crashed on stage 12 while being in third overall in GC (behind Basso and Gutierrez), and while he managed to finish the stage, he was forced to abandon by not starting the next stage.This was before majority of mountain stages.

And it will be news to you, but as anyone who followed Giro will tell you that it is much more climbing-oriented than Tour - the mountains are steeper and this year's Tour, for example, has only 3 tough mountain days, Giro had about twice that.

Even in other years Giro typically favors climbing specialists, which is why someone like Simoni can win it, but has no shot at TdF.

It's really astonishing that in your "25 years of cycling expertise" you haven't picked up on these basic facts. At least you have "inside" knowledge as to who is doping and who is not!


----------



## Squeegy200 (Dec 1, 2005)

stcanard said:


> I would expect them to mention it 6 months ago. Or yesterday. Or pretty much anything except minutes before you are about to start, forcing you to make an untested modification to the setup.
> 
> If anything its the UCI that should be taken to task for creating a dangerous situation, by suddenly forcing an untested setup.



I have not been able to confirm but isn't this the same bike Floyd used in the prologue? When they took his bike away at the start of Stage 7, he expressed that they allowed him to use it earlier so why is it illegal now?

Bicycling did an interesting windtunnel analysis of the Praying Mantis bike. If he would have used it, the measureable differences are claimed to have easily surpassed the deficit he lost to Gonchar. That also means a minute advantage he could have claimed prior to the climbing stages.


----------



## stcanard (Aug 4, 2005)

Squeegy200 said:


> I have not been able to confirm but isn't this the same bike Floyd used in the prologue? When they took his bike away at the start of Stage 7, he expressed that they allowed him to use it earlier so why is it illegal now?


Well, it appears that this may be all a tempest in a teacup -- aside from the mention on OLN, no one else has said anything about the UCI forcing a change.

According to Floyd's coach the problems were:

1) First set of handlebars cracked
2) The new bike had a less aerodynamic bottle cage
3) Worse yet, the bars on the new bike slipped, forcing a change in the position during the trial

With no mention of UCI changes.


----------



## Mocat4 (Jul 7, 2006)

stcanard said:


> Well, it appears that this may be all a tempest in a teacup -- aside from the mention on OLN, no one else has said anything about the UCI forcing a change.
> 
> According to Floyd's coach the problems were:
> 
> ...


 
We covered this earlier in this thread:


dlbcx said:


> <TABLE class=tborder id=post687222 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD class=alt1 id=td_post_687222>I went back on the Velonews site and found this:
> http://www.velonews.com/tour2006/tec...s/10296.0.html
> Sounds like the UCI did make Phonak change the bar position but the bar broke when Landis hit bump.


<!-- / message -->
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=alt2>Floyd's coach also talked about the UCI ruling on the OLN coverage the next day.</TD><TD class=alt1 align=right><!-- controls --></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


----------



## stcanard (Aug 4, 2005)

Mocat4 said:


> We covered this earlier in this thread:
> 
> <!-- / message -->
> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=alt2>Floyd's coach also talked about the UCI ruling on the OLN coverage the next day.</TD><TD class=alt1 align=right><!-- controls --></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


Hmm, totally missed it earlier in the thread (and Bob & Al's interviews are not enough to get me up at 5:30 AM to listen).

Okay, I go back to conspiracy theories then.


----------



## JimP (Dec 18, 2001)

It appears that Floyd's handlebars were higher than the UCI regulation:

1.3.013 The maximum height of the hand support point shall be level with or below a horizontal line passing through the horizontal plane of the saddle top. This point of support may not be situated behind the axis of the steering column. 

The overall length [forward projection] of the handlebars may not exceed a limit set 15 cm forward of a vertical line passing through the front wheel spindle.

1.3.022 Provided that they comply with the criteria mentioned in this article, handlebars known as “delta”, “cowhorn”, “triathlete”, which have short handlebar extensions may be used exclusively in the following events: 

Track: 
Individual and Team Pursuit 
Kilometre / 500 m Time Trial 
Record Attempt 
Road 
Time Trials. 
A forearm or elbow-rest shall be permitted.


----------



## stcanard (Aug 4, 2005)

JimP said:


> It appears that Floyd's handlebars were higher than the UCI regulation:


Well here's the problem: if they were too high on Saturday, they were too high on the prologue.

Given the amount of writing that has been put in by Floyd & his coach talking about how the bars on the replacement bike slipping a few mm cost him measurable time, I really doubt they change the setup with every TT.

<sarcasm>Maybe he should be suspended from the race -- after all you can't count the prologue time if he was riding an illegal bike, right?</sarcasm>

Hmm, maybe they'll consider it if Moreau gets close to the podium...


----------



## al0 (Jan 24, 2003)

rocco said:


> It seems rather ridiculous for the UCI to jerk any rider around like that. It's not like they hadn't approved his setup/position up to this point. It's a good thing he didn't crash out when his new setup failed. I wonder if his backup bike was in compliance? Anyway, if he could stay composed and still turn that kind of performance it would seem he's the man this year barring a catastrophe. ...like the UCI pulling another move like that. It's early still so I wouldn't bet on Landis yet though. ...on the other hand I would bet against Gonchar's GC chances for sure because he doesn't have chance in the mountains unless he's on the top shelf dope.


 
Why you are so sure about Gontchar? He has not so much chances to increase his lead in the mountains, but his chances to limit damage in the mountains and secure lead in second TT are more then decent. In Giro 2004 he was 2nd after Cunego and ahead of Simoni, and Gontchar had virtually no team support in that race. So (if T-mobile will put stake on hime and ride for him) he have that best chances from all ontenders (IMHO)


----------

