# Liège - Bastogne - Liège Picks



## moonmoth (Nov 8, 2008)

Who do you like to win LBL?

I'll sidestep the obvious choice, Phillipe Gilbert, and go with Simon Gerrans. SG has been in the hunt the past two races and he'll be on top of the podium this time.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

Gilbert is the obvious pick.

Purito will be in the hunt.

Dark horse? Nibali or Gesink.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

robdamanii said:


> Gilbert is the obvious pick.
> 
> Purito will be in the hunt.
> 
> Dark horse? Nibali or Gesink.


Gilbert will win, unless Vino pulls something special. He is on super form. Kolobnev, Schleck, Rodriguez, Sanchez and Anton will round it up, as usual.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

Gilbert's team will kill themselves to keep him in the hunt
and if he is in the hunt he will do the triple


----------



## Icculus (Mar 14, 2007)

2012 winner will be Cancellara.


----------



## moabbiker (Sep 11, 2002)

Going with Andy Schleck. He has the pressure on him from sponsors to do something special to compensate for all the bad luck (mostly due to Fabian).


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

moabbiker said:


> Going with Andy Schleck. He has the pressure on him from sponsors to do something special to compensate for all the bad luck (mostly due to Fabian).


he does? 
any statements from them?


----------



## Fignon's Barber (Mar 2, 2004)

I hate making the obvious pick, but gilbert is unstoppable right now.


----------



## harlond (May 30, 2005)

It is stupid to pick against Gilbert, but WTH, Sammy Sanchez.


----------



## weltyed (Feb 6, 2004)

vino will make a late attack and make it look intersting.

gesink? tony martin (is he still hurt?)? ryder might be able to pull it off.


----------



## foofighter (Dec 19, 2008)

is chavenel in the roster? he's got redemption after PR so that's my pick


----------



## Slow Eddie (Jun 28, 2004)

atpjunkie said:


> Gilbert's team will kill themselves to keep him in the hunt
> and if he is in the hunt he will do the *triple*


Or the Quad, if you count Brabantse Pijl.

Hard to bet against Gilbert for this one.


----------



## boneman (Nov 26, 2001)

*Gilbert*

Actually I'll go with Vino....Katusha's got a pretty strong team so Rodriquez or Kolobnev figure in the mix. Gilbert on form but it will be interesting to see if there's enough attrition at the end for him to get away considering how he'll be marked. Sammy Sanchez keeps knocking on the door and this race is perfect for him. Schleck brothers...we'll see but so far I've not been impressed by the Trek Leopard team and their DS in one day events.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

I think Gilbert is obvious and I'd bet on him, which is probably why someone other than Gilbert will win this one. When I'm that sure on someone, there's always an upset.


----------



## Keski (Sep 25, 2004)

I can't find a working live link. anyone got one?


----------



## Keski (Sep 25, 2004)

hahahahaha.....it's only Saturday....damn 4 day weekends.


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

Frank Shcleck, Janez Brajkovic, or Sylvan Chavanel


----------



## roadie92 (Jan 21, 2008)

1. Gilbert
2. A. Schleck
3. Kolobnev


----------



## RRRoubaix (Aug 27, 2008)

Keski said:


> hahahahaha.....it's only Saturday....damn 4 day weekends.


"FOUR"?!?
[email protected] and I thought I was cool because I got a 3-day weekend!

Hmm. Gilbert is obvious- and I definitely hope he wins, but for sentiment, I'll agree w/ foo and go w/ Chavanel.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

friday and monday are holidays in Switzerland

yes 4 day weekend FTW !


----------



## The Moontrane (Nov 28, 2005)

harlond said:


> It is stupid to pick against Gilbert, but WTH, Sammy Sanchez.


It is stupid to pick against Gilbert.

Vinokourov!


----------



## baker921 (Jul 20, 2007)

Salsa_Lover said:


> friday and monday are holidays in Switzerland
> 
> yes 4 day weekend FTW !


We have them all the time. Next friday, royal wedding; monday May day holiday.:thumbsup: :smilewinkgrin:

Oh and Gilbert for the race.


----------



## jhamlin38 (Oct 29, 2005)

Gilbert is the strong, strong favorite. 
1. Gilbert
2. Vino
3. Gesink


----------



## slowdave (Nov 29, 2005)

we put anzac day in for a five day week end, but i work shifts so, and to the race Phil, but i would love to see gerrans


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Chavanel?


----------



## Kram (Jan 28, 2004)

slowdave said:


> but i would love to see gerrans


I would too, since he's on my fantasy team. Gilbert, Vino, and Gerrans in any order would be nice for me:thumbsup:


----------



## Retro Grouch (Apr 30, 2002)

Anyone except Vino, please.


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

I'm going to throw out a random one.

1. Vasili Kiryenka
2. Vino
3. Gilbert.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

Bah. Frank and Andy are morons.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*well yes*



robdamanii said:


> Bah. Frank and Andy are morons.


why did one not go and force Gilbert to chase and then switch?

Gilbert's move on the San Nicolas was brilliant. Dumped the superior sprinter, and found which Schleck was a threat


----------



## agm2 (Sep 18, 2008)

robdamanii said:


> Bah. Frank and Andy are morons.


I'm completely with you. I guess we are finding out what Trek-Leopold is good at this year.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

atpjunkie said:


> why did one not go and force Gilbert to chase and then switch?
> 
> Gilbert's move on the San Nicolas was brilliant. Dumped the superior sprinter, and found which Schleck was a threat


maybe because they were shot? much easier from the couch.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

Gilbert is Mr Spring
3rd M_S-R
9th Ronde (where he did try to launch a winning move)
1st Amstel
1st Fleche
1st L-B-L
and he's won Lombardy what 2x??
best classics rider out there right now


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

den bakker said:


> maybe because they were shot? much easier from the couch.


What was Frank shot from? Sitting on? True he may not have had the legs but I think Frank and Andy get too caught up on waiting for each other Frank spent most of the time post Gilberts attack looking back to see where Andy was, Frank looked srtong and Philip had put himself out there that was the time for Frank to counter even a little to see where gilbert was instead he just sits there hoping Andy can make it back. And then istead of attacking and making Philip do anything Andy pulls them into the link like they had any chance of beating Philip in a sprint. At that point it would have been worth sacrificing one brother to see if they could put Gilbert under pressure of hell even just at least try one attack instead they might as well have been drawing a Lotto paycheck today.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*Andy was cooked*



32and3cross said:


> What was Frank shot from? Sitting on? True he may not have had the legs but I think Frank and Andy get too caught up on waiting for each other Frank spent most of the time post Gilberts attack looking back to see where Andy was, Frank looked srtong and Philip had put himself out there that was the time for Frank to counter even a little to see where gilbert was instead he just sits there hoping Andy can make it back. And then istead of attacking and making Philip do anything Andy pulls them into the link like they had any chance of beating Philip in a sprint. At that point it would have been worth sacrificing one brother to see if they could put Gilbert under pressure of hell even just at least try one attack instead they might as well have been drawing a Lotto paycheck today.



which is why he lead it out, but hoping to beat PG in a sprint is just dumb, especially given
a) this is his home race
b) his shot to do the triple
c) he's a better finisher

which is why Gilbert's move was so brilliant, he was outmanned and still dictated the terms of combat

but yes, after Andy caught on he should have gone forcing Gilbert to chase and then Frank could have countered
but maybe they were resigned to it because they knew he was better


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

32and3cross said:


> What was Frank shot from? Sitting on? .


what was the other 197 riders or so shot from? Oh that's right, the bus to the last 40 km was broken so they had to ride out there.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*I agree den*



den bakker said:


> what was the other 197 riders or so shot from? Oh that's right, the bus to the last 40 km was broken so they had to ride out there.


clearly Andy was shot as he couldn't follow on Gilbert's move
maybe it took all Frank's reserves just to hang on
it just shows Gilbert's tactical and physical superiority at this moment


----------



## MG537 (Jul 25, 2006)

agm2 said:


> I'm completely with you. I guess we are finding out what Trek-Leopold is good at this year.


I think that by now L-Trek should stop beating around the bush and clearly make Andy the team leader. Frank just doesn't have it. They could use him for shredding the peloton to bits but clearly Andy is the stronger of the two.

As for Gilbert, all I can say is WOW!


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

MG537 said:


> I think that by now L-Trek should stop beating around the bush and clearly make Andy the team leader. Frank just doesn't have it. They could use him for shredding the peloton to bits but clearly Andy is the stronger of the two.
> 
> As for Gilbert, all I can say is WOW!


Actually Andy was the one who got shed when Gilbert attacked on CLR Frank was able to hang on but I guess thats all he was able to do.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

den bakker said:


> what was the other 197 riders or so shot from? Oh that's right, the bus to the last 40 km was broken so they had to ride out there.


The other 197 riders were not a factor anymore at that point so bringing them up is pointless. 

Clearly Gilbert was the strongest but the fact that Frank started the move and Andy dragged Philip up to him puts a bit of pressure on them to at least try something to actually win the race. I would agree they might have been at their limits but when Gilbert slowed after his attack and Andy was able to get back on it would have been prudent to either Frank or Andy to try something to see of Gilbert had any weak points. 

Having Andy go to the front and lead Gilbert to the line was basicly handing him the race as there very very little chance that Frank was going to win the sprint. I think the Schleck Bros got too caught up in making sure they were both on the podium at the price of trying for the win, which to some degree is understandable. It would have been very hard to beat Gilbert no matter what but honestly it seemed like after they got away and it wasn't just the two of them they did little to try, I will say that is always much easier to say when its not you yourself riding.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

32and3cross said:


> I will say that is always much easier to say when its not you yourself riding.


Got there eventually


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*yup*



32and3cross said:


> Actually Andy was the one who got shed when Gilbert attacked on CLR Frank was able to hang on but I guess thats all he was able to do.


and Frank is the guy with classics wins
and Andy is nowhere near his peak yet, he's still 2 months off


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

Just to be clear though. It's expected a Schleck can solo 10 km with around 40 seconds to the chase group?
Because that was the scenario. Gilbert would just sit up, he could win the sprint anyway.


----------



## MG537 (Jul 25, 2006)

atpjunkie said:


> and Frank is the guy with classics wins
> and Andy is nowhere near his peak yet, he's still 2 months off


Did I miss a few years? 
Frank Amstel Gold 2006
Andy LBL 2009

That's it.


----------



## MG537 (Jul 25, 2006)

32and3cross said:


> Actually Andy was the one who got shed when Gilbert attacked on CLR Frank was able to hang on but I guess thats all he was able to do.


Yeah, after he had done most of the work to get Phil and his brother out front.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*correct*



MG537 said:


> Did I miss a few years?
> Frank Amstel Gold 2006
> Andy LBL 2009
> 
> That's it.


I forgot Andy won LBL in 2009


----------



## pretender (Sep 18, 2007)

atpjunkie said:


> which is why Gilbert's move was so brilliant, he was outmanned and still dictated the terms of combat


Not brilliant IMO but simply the only rational thing to do when you are one vs. two.

At that point, Gilbert was not aware that the Schlecks were more than happy to tow him to the final sprint. It's absolutely idiotic what they did, full stop, no excuses. Even if Gilbert still ends up beating them, at least make him work for it.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*just thinking*



pretender said:


> Not brilliant IMO but simply the only rational thing to do when you are one vs. two.
> 
> At that point, Gilbert was not aware that the Schlecks were more than happy to tow him to the final sprint. It's absolutely idiotic what they did, full stop, no excuses. Even if Gilbert still ends up beating them, at least make him work for it.


his head 'okay I'm outmanned and I have a superior sprinter in tow doing no work"

what does he do?

attack, drop the sprinter and reduce the effectiveness of the duo

it was the right thing to do, and he did it

the right thing for the Schlecks was for Frank to sit on and when Andy caught up, have Andy rest a second and then go over the top

they didn't do the right thing


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

MG537 said:


> Yeah, after he had done most of the work to get Phil and his brother out front.


Like I said tactics were lacking on the Shlecks part.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

atpjunkie said:


> his head 'okay I'm outmanned and I have a superior sprinter in tow doing no work"
> 
> what does he do?
> 
> ...


Yep Frank and Andy boned that up at the end, tho I think instead of sitting on Frank should have had a dig at Gilbert after Philip's attack but he may have just had no legs at that point.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

den bakker said:


> Got there eventually


No I knew that all along but its pretty clear that the Shlecks hould have had a game plan beyond the "we two get away and ride two up to a brilliant brotherly 1,2" and they didn't - they didn't even try in fact if they had not legs at the end its because they did too much work before that establishing the break while towing PG along, Im guessing the mis judged their own strength - hmm seems to be a running theme on that team.


----------



## Gatorback (Jul 11, 2009)

I'm in the camp that thinks the Schleck brothers may not be playing with a full deck upstairs (or at least not today). They never even attacked Gilbert on the climb--and they knew that was the only way they could beat him. Why not try? It is a Classic. They had two guys to go against him. 

The Schlecks need to be glad Gilbert was smart enough to go ahead and drop the hammer for a minute at the time of the climb to get rid of the BMC rider. Otherwise the Schlecks probably would have gotten 3rd and 4th instead of 2nd and 3rd.


----------



## albert owen (Jul 7, 2008)

Great win by Gilbert, though let's face it, when it was down to him v the Schlecks he was 100% guaranteed to win, barring a Tsunami striking Belgium.
Am I alone in thinking that the Schlecks are quite simply THE most boring thing to happen to Pro Cycling in its entire history?


----------



## farm (Jul 10, 2008)

From the highlights on sporza.be, when the Schlecks attacked they were both out of the saddle, while Gilbert marked it easily staying seated.


----------



## boneman (Nov 26, 2001)

*Mr. Fall is now Mr. Spring*

Lombardy and Paris Tours....his classics win rate is the highest of all riders for the last couple of years. Clearly the strongest and has gotten the tactical nous to with the legs. Winning with style!




atpjunkie said:


> Gilbert is Mr Spring
> 3rd M_S-R
> 9th Ronde (where he did try to launch a winning move)
> 1st Amstel
> ...


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*yup*



boneman said:


> Lombardy and Paris Tours....his classics win rate is the highest of all riders for the last couple of years. Clearly the strongest and has gotten the tactical nous to with the legs. Winning with style!


so good to see a guy who is an unabashed classics racer
even the Cricket says this kid is great


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

Well at least Andy or Frank didn't crash so they could use it as an excuse as to why the other didn't win. That seems to be a favorite of theirs. They got worked over. PG let them establish the break, and even let them drive it to his sprint finish. Compare this to what Cancellara had to do which is establish the break, drag everyone along and lose. Maybe Leopard-Trek should have watched those videos. PG wasn't going to sit in until the finish. He was going at some point. How stoked do you think he was to sit in and enjoy his delivery to the finish line?


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

32and3cross said:


> The other 197 riders were not a factor anymore at that point so bringing them up is pointless.
> 
> Clearly Gilbert was the strongest but the fact that Frank started the move and Andy dragged Philip up to him puts a bit of pressure on them to at least try something to actually win the race. I would agree they might have been at their limits but when Gilbert slowed after his attack and Andy was able to get back on it would have been prudent to either Frank or Andy to try something to see of Gilbert had any weak points.
> 
> Having Andy go to the front and lead Gilbert to the line was basicly handing him the race as there very very little chance that Frank was going to win the sprint. I think the Schleck Bros got too caught up in making sure they were both on the podium at the price of trying for the win, which to some degree is understandable. It would have been very hard to beat Gilbert no matter what but honestly it seemed like after they got away and it wasn't just the two of them they did little to try, I will say that is always much easier to say when its not you yourself riding.


This was their failure IMHO. I think first and tenth is better than second and third. They both wanted a podium shot, and it cost them the win. If Andy truly hangs it out for Frank, he is baked and gets cought and finishes with the rest of the pack somewhere. They must have decided otherwise, but it is really a sign of who is leading the team. Nobody. If it was Franks race to win, Andy should have done his work and finished where he may, but the team is still too interested in making him have a persona of invincibility. Does it matter he cought back on? No. Frank counters the PG move and puts PG in the red. Andy goes back, but you have a chance at a win. Instead he waited, Andy caught on and delivered PG to a win like an overpaid domestique.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

Argh! I thought for sure a Schleck was going to win this!
What was I thinking?

Tactics were laughable (or they just didn't have the guns to double-team PG) - not what one would expect of the new Super Team that was going to change the world of cycling, what a joke.

Leopldo Treksta is not impressing. Hope they can do something in the Grand Tours...


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

LostViking said:


> Argh! I thought for sure a Schleck was going to win this!
> What was I thinking?
> 
> Tactics were laughable (or they just didn't have the guns to double-team PG) - not what one would expect of the new Super Team that was going to change the world of cycling, what a joke.
> ...


with all the talk about Schleck's failed tactics - let's not forget that the odds were stacked against them from the beginning. Gilbert is not only a punchier sprinter, he is also a punchier climber and rode Andy off the group by not even making a suprise attack - simply by openly going to the front and turning up the pace!

I am just not sure there was ANYTHING Schlecks could have done, considering Gilbert's strength and charging group behind. They basically hoped for a miracle, but at least they made the race when it mattered - it was just Gilbert was there with them the whole time.

It's the kind of wishful thinking along the lines of "if Andy Schleck had better strategy against Contador he could have won last two TdFs". Sometimes you just lose regardless of strategy, because the other guy is simply on better form and no amount of "strategery", as dubya would say, can compensate for it.

I don't think it was such a disastrous season for Leopard team - the expectations were extremely high, but they were consistently in the mix and between Cancellara's cobble classics and Schlecks in Ardennes their team was among the most consistent, and was always present at the front. So they only have E3 win, and a string of second place finishes - but they keep knocking on the door and will get more results for sure. 

Some of it is bad luck, but they will do better over long term than some of these other teams (like Saxxo or Garmin) that may have scored a win here and there based primarily on luck and other circumstances, in a way that will be hard to reproduce again.

What I mean here is that if you could run the same race many times over, the Leopard, Quickstep etc. will win a fair share of races. I wish I could say the same about Saxxo or Garmin.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*the Schlecks*



55x11 said:


> with all the talk about Schleck's failed tactics - let's not forget that the odds were stacked against them from the beginning. Gilbert is not only a punchier sprinter, he is also a punchier climber and rode Andy off the group by not even making a suprise attack - simply by openly going to the front and turning up the pace!
> 
> I am just not sure there was ANYTHING Schlecks could have done, considering Gilbert's strength and charging group behind. They basically hoped for a miracle, but at least they made the race when it mattered - it was just Gilbert was there with them the whole time.
> 
> ...


agree with you
they just flat out admitted 'we were good, Gilbert was straight up better'
neither had the legs to beat him


----------



## foofighter (Dec 19, 2008)

i noticed that Gilbert's pedaling technique is interesting, he pedals with the toes pointed downward whereas the Schlecks are more typical flat feet pedaling. 

Any advantage to Gilbert's technique? Or just personal preference?


----------



## weltyed (Feb 6, 2004)

once gilbert got up front, it looked good for him. when the schlecks were up there with him, things looked a little dicier. they staretd to use him right by putting him out front to face the wind. the problem was he knew the group was far enough back to not be a big threat, so he could dictate the pace. once trek saw that happening, they should have started to work him over a bit. of course, thats if they had the legs. 

its funny with the schlecks. when the two get together at first you kinda fear what they will do. but lately not much has happened. things even seemed disappointing when they were togetherat last years tour. didnt they have contador isolated and couldnt shut the door?

what races has trek (the company) won this year?

and i noticed gilbert was riding toes down. i dont think he did it the entire time.


----------



## pretender (Sep 18, 2007)

atpjunkie said:


> neither had the legs to beat him


That's not really the point. The point is that they had him 2-on-1 with a big gap on the rest of the field for the final 3km and didn't attack once. They should have at least made him work for his victory.


----------



## allison (Apr 19, 2006)

foofighter said:


> i noticed that Gilbert's pedaling technique is interesting, he pedals with the toes pointed downward whereas the Schlecks are more typical flat feet pedaling.
> 
> Any advantage to Gilbert's technique? Or just personal preference?


Saw this too! I have foot issues that are affecting my riding (er, life in general) right now, so was curious as to whether it is better to ride heels up or down when I noticed this in the replay.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

pretender said:


> That's not really the point. The point is that they had him 2-on-1 with a big gap on the rest of the field for the final 3km and didn't attack once. They should have at least made him work for his victory.


Add to that they did most of the riding to create the gap so if they didn't have any legs in the final it was because they used them up earlier, when honestly it matter less because clearly those 3 were the strongest but rather than be willing to let it reshuffle at all they just rode pulling clear a guy they had no hope of beating one on one - or it appears even two on one.


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

32and3cross said:


> Add to that they did most of the riding to create the gap so if they didn't have any legs in the final it was because they used them up earlier, when honestly it matter less because clearly those 3 were the strongest but rather than be willing to let it reshuffle at all they just rode pulling clear a guy they had no hope of beating one on one - or it appears even two on one.


It was Gilbert's race to lose as it was for Cancellara this spring. They figured out that if you wait long enough, Cancellara would do the work for you. leopard-trek couldn't wait and sprung their cards too early. Gilbert would eventually have gone.


----------



## The Weasel (Jul 20, 2006)

It's just horrible how all the other teams rode against Leopard again, causing them to loose another classic.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

spookyload said:


> It was Gilbert's race to lose as it was for Cancellara this spring. They figured out that if you wait long enough, Cancellara would do the work for you. leopard-trek couldn't wait and sprung their cards too early. Gilbert would eventually have gone.


Your right it was Gilberts to lose and had they waited til he went (privided they both could go with him) it might have changed the dynamic alot PG might have felt more pressure to ride and the Schlecks might have been able to force him to work more and maybe thrown in some attacks that might have put PG on the defensive. But towing him to the line like they did was just handing the race to him.


----------



## The Weasel (Jul 20, 2006)

pretender said:


> Not brilliant IMO but simply the only rational thing to do when you are one vs. two.
> 
> At that point, Gilbert was not aware that the Schlecks were more than happy to tow him to the final sprint. It's absolutely idiotic what they did, full stop, no excuses. Even if Gilbert still ends up beating them, at least make him work for it.


Not only that, after Andy's initial attack, Frank went too, allowing Gilbert to latch on. Granted, he probably would have made the jump, but why give him Frank's wheel too. Dumb. But was happy to see Gilbert beat them both.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

Gatorback said:


> I'm in the camp that thinks the Schleck brothers may not be playing with a full deck upstairs (or at least not today). They never even attacked Gilbert on the climb--and they knew that was the only way they could beat him. Why not try? It is a Classic. They had two guys to go against him.
> 
> The Schlecks need to be glad Gilbert was smart enough to go ahead and drop the hammer for a minute at the time of the climb to get rid of the BMC rider. Otherwise the Schlecks probably would have gotten 3rd and 4th instead of 2nd and 3rd.


In all fairness, in an interview to cyclingnews Andy Schleck said the following (I am quoting him, verbatim):



> "Frank and I totally forgot to attack on the hill. It happens. We had plenty of energy, in fact we were both soft-pedaling the last 20K and could have easily dropped Gilbert any time we wanted, but it actually never occurred to us to drop him. In retrospect, it would have probably been a pretty good strategy, and I am sure we would have won the race. I don't know why we never thought of it - apparently many people on internet forums figured out that riding faster than Gilbert would have been a good strategy for winning the race, and when I read their posts, I had an epiphany - of course! That's how we could have easily won the race, by dropping Gilbert! I wish I listened to these guys, they are strategic geniuses! And of course I don't think Gilbert would have been able to follow us - he is a very slow sprinter and can't climb, at all! Especially on short, punchy hills. And naturally, Frank and I are well-known for our sprinting, explosive climbing abilities.
> 
> It's regrettable, but live and learn. I guess next time I will try to remember to attack - what could be more simple than dropping some no-name rider like Gilbert on a steep short climb? I also need to keep checking those internet forums for other gems. For example, it never occurred to me that I could have easily dropped Contador last year and win TdF. Also, during first time trial I probably should have pedaled faster - and then would have gotten a faster time. I wish I knew this before."


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

LostViking said:


> Leopldo Treksta is not impressing. Hope they can do something in the Grand Tours...


Were they ever intended as anything but a grand tour team? Cancellara came onboard as an afterthought.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

boneman said:


> .we'll see but so far I've not been impressed by the Trek Leopard team and their DS in one day events.


I am not sure why you guys are not impressed with Leopard Trek. Cancellara not impressive? I think he was VERY impressive. Definitely the MOST impressive on cobbles.

And Schlecks were very impressive too in Ardennes. A higher profile win than E3 would be great, but they were impressive nonetheless. There were definitely many riders and teams who weren't a factor at all.


----------



## rufus (Feb 3, 2004)

They may not have had the legs to beat Gilbert, or even to put much of an attack on him. But at least they could have _tried_.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

32and3cross said:


> Like I said tactics were lacking on the Shlecks part.


Ahh, tactics, shmactics. First you need LEGS to win. No amount of tactics can overcome the fact that the other guy is so much stronger, that he can literally ride you off the wheel.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*they said they did attack*



32and3cross said:


> Add to that they did most of the riding to create the gap so if they didn't have any legs in the final it was because they used them up earlier, when honestly it matter less because clearly those 3 were the strongest but rather than be willing to let it reshuffle at all they just rode pulling clear a guy they had no hope of beating one on one - or it appears even two on one.



even where they got away, but couldn't shrug Gilbert
they said they tried but had nothing and when Gilbert went it clearly showed who was strongest


----------



## FlandersFields (Jul 16, 2010)

atpjunkie said:


> Gilbert is Mr Spring
> 3rd M_S-R
> 9th Ronde (where he did try to launch a winning move)
> 1st Amstel
> ...


And Strade Bianchi as well...


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

atpjunkie said:


> even where they got away, but couldn't shrug Gilbert
> they said they tried but had nothing and when Gilbert went it clearly showed who was strongest


Not disagreeing that they could not beat him but they did not try anything aside from "ride on the front hard and see if he goes away".


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

*Spartacus - an afterthought?*



Cinelli 82220 said:


> Were they ever intended as anything but a grand tour team? Cancellara came onboard as an afterthought.


Appears you are right - for now. Besides E3 and a few sprint stage victories - not much Leopard to be seen on a Trek.

I can't accept that you lure a rider of Spartacus' calibre away from Saxo as an "afterthought." Surley the paycheck he demands would prohibit that?

Seems like Nygaard and co were intent on gutting Saxo and prob promised Spartacus anything to get him out of Saxo - then when The Classics rolled around they essentially told him to win them on his own. 

In an earlier thread - pre Classice - I questioned Leopard's commitment to winning the Classics this year and was told here that the sponsors expected a great classics season from Leopard Trek...

Which brings us full circle - this team was built so a Schleck could win the Tour de France on a Trek - basta!


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

LostViking said:


> Appears you are right - for now. Besides E3 and a few sprint stage victories - not much Leopard to be seen on a Trek.
> 
> I can't accept that you lure a rider of Spartacus' calibre away from Saxo as an "afterthought." Surley the paycheck he demands would prohibit that?
> 
> ...


Except Spartacus' failure to win Paris Roubaix and Flanders had nothing to do with lack of support. O'Grady (*former PR winner himself) is as good support as anyone can get. He overextended himself in Flanders by going too early (if it worked, and it almost did, we would all be talking about how genius he is), and at PR it was tactical - the teams wanted Spartacus to lose more than they wanted their top riders to win. In both cases, Joe Schmoe wins instead. It wasn't like Chavanel, Boonen, Ballan or Hushovd won by outsmarting Cancellara. I failed to see how having a lot more support can help Cancellara win anything in this scenario. 

Was I the only one who was still impressed by the way Cancellara rode both races? He has balls to follow Boonen's stupid attack, counter it, drop Pozzato and Boonen, bridge to Chavanel and ride at the front for 15 miles with entire peloton and full BMC squad chasing.
Then he gets caught, recovers and attacks again, with only Chavanel and Nuyens (just barely) being able to follow.

In PR, he called Hushovd's and Ballan's bluff. And then dropped them and almost got to Van Summeren.

Cancellara also got second in Milan San Remo - not bad for someone who is not a sprinter.

And Schleck went for it in both Amstel Gold and LBL, where he got second. Plus a win in E3. 

I don't think it was a bad season for Leopard Trek - at ALL. On the overall spring classics record, only Omega Pharma Lotto had a better season, thanks to Gilbert.


----------

