# Anyone else won The Tour by something other than their riding?



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

Clearly Contador won only by the bad luck of Andy's chain drop. Have there been any other winners whose winning margin was due (or so clearly due?) to something other than their out-riding their competitors?


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

Or was it because of Cadel's wrist injury, or LA's inability to stay upright, oh, Wiggo could have won it if he hadn't been so mediocre. If he coulda he woulda. You going for a 700 post thread matey? Well done both of them, it was a close tour but I can't see where Schleck was demonstrably superior in any way.


----------



## matchmaker (Aug 15, 2009)

sir duke said:


> Or was it because of Cadel's wrist injury, or LA's inability to stay upright, oh, Wiggo could have won it if he hadn't been so mediocre. If he coulda he woulda. You going for a 700 post thread matey? Well done both of them, it was a close tour but I can't see where Schleck was demonstrably superior in any way.


I can't see where a guy who can't even win a stage is superior. His only superiority is in unethical behavior.

To the OP, there have been many tours with strange scenarios. Merckx once won the tour against Ocaña when the latter was the better rider. Lemond won the tour in an incredible last TT because fignon did not use an aerodynamic helmet, neither a triathlon steer. Lance won about 2 tours by his own admission because of mental superiority over the others. Certainly Ulrich could have won a tour on LA, but repeated falls in TT and bad descents decided otherwise.


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

sir duke said:


> Or was it because of Cadel's wrist injury,..


Wasn't asking about runners up, only about previous winners whose win was for something other than riding.


----------



## tinkerbeast (Jul 24, 2009)

sir duke said:


> Or was it because of Cadel's wrist injury, or LA's inability to stay upright, oh, Wiggo could have won it if he hadn't been so mediocre. If he coulda he woulda. You going for a 700 post thread matey? Well done both of them, it was a close tour but* I can't see where Schleck was demonstrably superior in any way*.


i think the point was contador wasn't demonstrably superior in any way


----------



## tconrady (May 1, 2007)

I can't remember who it was....but I believe a rider was assaulted by a fan that affected the outcome. I believe it was one of the greats who one 5 tours and it kept them from a 6th....I think. Or it could be a bad week to quit sniffing glue!


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

Shades of the I love Lance/Hate Conti threads of the past.

Just replace "Lance" with "Andy" and there is no need for more threads like this.

Conti won. Time to move on to next year's TdF!


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

matchmaker said:


> I can't see where a guy who can't even win a stage is superior. His only superiority is in unethical behavior.


Hark, the sound of a dead horse being flogged.


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

LostViking said:


> Shades of the I love Lance/Hate Conti threads of the past.
> 
> Just replace "Lance" with "Andy" and there is no need for more threads like this.
> 
> Conti won. Time to move on to next year's TdF!


What does this have to do with the question I asked?


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Contador 07', was taking a beating from Rassmussen before he got pulled out.
Periero 06' was outridden by Landis before his positive.
That's two examples of guys winning without being the best rider in the race.

Condador didn't win because of Andy's luck, he won because Andy's legs couldn't overcome his bad luck. Stuff happens, the race is 21 days long and luck is part of it. Schleck had days in the mountains to get the time back, he couldn't do it. Contador did a great Tour to protect 8 seconds and Andy did a spectacular ride in trying get that time back.


----------



## nOOky (Mar 20, 2009)

InfiniteLoop said:


> Clearly Contador won only by the bad luck of Andy's chain drop. Have there been any other winners whose winning margin was due (or so clearly due?) to something other than their out-riding their competitors?


Right off the bat, he only won because of Andy's chain drop? You don't think he would have taken the stage up the Tourmelet if things were different? That was a gift to Andy. While they were pretty even up the mountains, I do believe Contador could have taken the time necessary to win at some point regardless of that stage. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

Precisely, the result being a narrow win for Contador.


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

matchmaker said:


> ... Merckx once won the tour against Ocaña when the latter was the better rider. Lemond won the tour in an incredible last TT because fignon did not use an aerodynamic helmet, neither a triathlon steer. Lance won about 2 tours by his own admission because of mental superiority over the others. Certainly Ulrich could have won a tour on LA, but repeated falls in TT and bad descents decided otherwise.


Of these LeMond over Fignon might be the closest, though I see a difference in an advantage based on employing superior legal technology and an advantage based on a competitors misfortune. Mental superiority is very much a part of all athletics and is part of competition. Personally I'd rate mishaps in TT's differently (and likewise, if the yellow jersey or any other very direct competitor had already been off the back of the group or was a group behind)


----------



## Swish (Jul 31, 2004)

InfiniteLoop said:


> Clearly Contador won only by the bad luck of Andy's chain drop. Have there been any other winners whose winning margin was due (or so clearly due?) to something other than their out-riding their competitors?


Schleck wasn't better than Contador, Contador took some more time in the TT today, ergo the best man won (or slightly better man).


----------



## gebbyfish (Apr 26, 2002)

tconrady said:


> I can't remember who it was....but I believe a rider was assaulted by a fan that affected the outcome. I believe it was one of the greats who one 5 tours and it kept them from a 6th....I think. Or it could be a bad week to quit sniffing glue!


Eddy Merckx


----------



## Maximus_XXIV (Nov 10, 2008)

If AS had not attacked, he would not have dropped the chain.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

*In the Loop?*



InfiniteLoop said:


> What does this have to do with the question I asked?


Refers to the rest of your post...not your loaded question.


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

nOOky said:


> Right off the bat, he only won because of Andy's chain drop? You don't think he would have taken the stage up the Tourmelet if things were different? That was a gift to Andy. While they were pretty even up the mountains, I do believe Contador could have taken the time necessary to win at some point regardless of that stage. Just my 2 cents.


I think Contador would have it he could. He wanted to prove that his final victory in Paris was by more than any gains from Andy's chain drop and he wanted to win a stage. At least after following Andy all the way up he didn't try to sprint around (which I assume he could have) for the win.


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

Deleted


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

InfiniteLoop said:


> Clearly Contador won only by the bad luck of Andy's chain drop. Have there been any other winners whose winning margin was due (or so clearly due?) to something other than their out-riding their competitors?


I don't see it as clearly as you do. Things being different more likely Contador would have at least got a second or two, at a minimum, in the sprint at the top of the Tourmalet and still beat Schleck.

But to answer your question, the year Pantani beat Ullrich, Ullrich was clearly the stronger rider. Pantani went on a long escapade in the mountains on a rain-filled day, where Ullrich either flatted before or soon after Pantani attacked and could not catch him back.

Ullrich was isolated and went downhill very bady in the conditions and then cracked on the final climb and lost many minutes to Pantani that day, but otherwise was superior to him.


----------



## jjjdc1 (Oct 3, 2006)

Is is out of the question for AS to attack on the final day? Is the last stage just formality and fan fair save for the final sprint? 

Josh


----------



## cpark (Oct 13, 2004)

InfiniteLoop said:


> Clearly Contador won only by the bad luck of Andy's chain drop. Have there been any other winners whose winning margin was due (or so clearly due?) to something other than their out-riding their competitors?


LeMond had to give up 85 Tour to BH, even though GL was stronger rider.
LeMond won 89 Tour due to benefit of Scott aerobar.
Perico won 88 Tour, and accused of using drugs, but was never found guilty.
LeMond won 90 Tour without winning a stage.
In fact, if Indurain didn't ride for Perico, LeMond would've not won the Tour.
But then again, if he didn't get shot by his brother in-law, he would've probably won 87 and 88 Tour.
Riis admitted using performance enhancing drug during his tour win.
Riis' teammate Jan was accused of using performance durg as well, but was never found guilty. 
Pantani was busted in Giro, so you can speculate that he cheated.
Sastre won because AC wasn't allowed to ride.
Then, there is LA........you make the call.

That's life......


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

InfiniteLoop said:


> The issue is that Contador's overall winning margin will be considerably less than what he gained by attacking Andy when his chain dropped. If Contador had won by a greater margin (39 seconds ?) there would be little or no controversy.


Isn't his winning margin the same as what he gained when Schleck dropped his chain?


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

*Unwritten Rule*



jjjdc1 said:


> Is is out of the question for AS to attack on the final day? Is the last stage just formality and fan fair save for the final sprint?
> 
> Josh


One of those "unwritten rules" - you don't attack the Yellow Jersey on the final stage.
I'd like a re-write, but can't find the book!  

So yes, for Conti the final day is a parade, not a race. Only the Sprinters and their teams will be aggressive tomorrow.


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Isn't his winning margin the same as what he gained when Schleck dropped his chain?


Yep. I thought I'd heard Ligett say 14 seconds (thus 22s win) but turned out to be 31s so he wins by 39s thus the controversy effectively boils down to the advantage of starting last in the TT.


----------



## jjjdc1 (Oct 3, 2006)

LostViking said:


> One of those "unwritten rules" - you don't attack the Yellow Jersey on the final stage.
> I'd like a re-write, but can't find the book!
> 
> So yes, for Conti the final day is a parade, not a race. Only the Sprinters and their teams will be aggressive tomorrow.


That's what I figured, but would be interesting none the less of it happened.

Josh


----------



## gh1 (Jun 7, 2008)

Yawn.....was a great tour, next year should be great as well


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

LostViking said:


> One of those "unwritten rules" - you don't attack the Yellow Jersey on the final stage.


I think there have been races on the last day but only when the top 2 were within just a few seconds (LeMond?). It's also extremely tough to gain any time on a flat stage so from a practical standpoint probably any more than a very few seconds diff wouldn't be worth it and I think it's there that the unwritten rule says no attacking the yellow (eg, no attacking unless it's realistic to contest it)


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

InfiniteLoop said:


> Deleted


Shame, if your post hadn't been deleted I might have agreed with you......
mechanical??


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

InfiniteLoop said:


> I think there have been races on the last day but only when the top 2 were within just a few seconds (LeMond?). It's also extremely tough to gain any time on a flat stage so from a practical standpoint probably any more than a very few seconds diff wouldn't be worth it and I think it's there that the unwritten rule says no attacking the yellow (eg, no attacking unless it's realistic to contest it)


you think? Aren't you the in-house expert on the unwritten rules?


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

sir duke said:


> Shame, if your post hadn't been deleted I might have agreed with you......
> mechanical??


My post was inaccurate thus my deletion.


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

InfiniteLoop said:


> Yep. I thought I'd heard Ligett say 14 seconds (thus 22s win) but turned out to be 31s so he wins by 39s thus the controversy effectively boils down to the advantage of starting last in the TT.


Those 31s match what was before the chain drop, simply proving AC would've at least caught Andy no matter what.

But to jump on what could be controversy over where AC started in this TT: I think the only thing he took advantage of was deciding his effort. I bet if he started earlier, he'd have gone much harder. Call me out for assumptions, but based on last year and comparing him to AS, Contador looks like he could've bested Schleck by much more than 31 seconds today. 

IF any of that is indeed true, then the bigger question/controversy imo is why AC didn't challenge Menchov's time? He'll pose a much larger threat in the next stage. Whatever AC gained on him during stage 17 evaporated today.


----------



## Snakebitten (Jun 26, 2008)

Congrats to Conty. If anything this years shows that Contador will not have and easy time in the TDF with Schleck emerging as a very strong rival especially if he keeps improving his TTing. I expect Schleck to be in yellow at the end of next years TDF. Man I wish Menchov went earlier with Cancellara when the wind was nonexistant. I think he would have been right there with Spartacus. Phenominal ride against the wind for Denny.

Still think LA would have been 3rd or 4th or top 5 at the very least if all the crashing didnt happen. Never seen so much unfortunate incidents happen to him before. Lot of LA hate on this site but I really believe that even at his age he is better than 95-97% of the guys on the tour this year and last, baring his misfortune. No fanboism here just looking at the numbers. How can you dismiss him at 37 yo getting a podium last year and at 38 yo finishing 23rd out of 170 riders this year despite all the misfortune? He could have finished higher if he attacked the TT but he just rode off into the sunset. 

Lot of AC hate too which is unfortunate as the man did what he had to do the win his 3rd. I salute him and the way he and Andy competed against each other. I think the fanbois of both need to remove their bias and look at the cold hard numbers. 

BTW Im gonna miss Alphonse lol. The look on LA's face in those commercials gave me laughs. Kind of like a Mr. Bean character but with speech.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*yup*



gebbyfish said:


> Eddy Merckx


punched in the gut by a French guy
and he would have had a 7th but took a year off at the Tour's request, so he won the Giro (GC and Points), the Vuelta (GC and Points), Paris - Roubaix, Liège - Bastogne - Liège,
Grand Prix des Nations, Amstel Gold Race, Ghent - Wevelgem, Omloop Het Volk, 
Paris - Brussels, GP Fourmies, Super Prestige Pernod Trophy 
and set the hour record instead (1973)


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

InfiniteLoop said:


> My post was inaccurate thus my deletion.


Pure speculation based on 'what might have been' doesn't need to be accurate. But I guess you knew that...


----------



## weltyed (Feb 6, 2004)

this thread is so awesome.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

tinkerbeast said:


> i think the point was contador wasn't demonstrably superior in any way


10 seconds each on the mountain stages
~30 seconds each due to mechanicals.

but Contador was :

15 seconds better during the prologue
31 seconds better during the ITT

So yes, Contador was demostrably better.


----------



## haikalah (Oct 5, 2004)

How much of the margin this year is attributable to the teams of AS and AC? Did Andy or Alberto have the stronger team? (On the cobbles AS clearly benefitted.)


----------



## yater (Nov 30, 2006)

tinkerbeast said:


> i think the point was contador wasn't demonstrably superior in any way


He didn't dump his chain, and he didn't crash, and he was faster in the TTs, and he took that one mtn stage by 10seconds. I'm a Schleck fan, but you can't do ALL of these things and expect to win. The field waited for him once. Contador was superior....like it or not.


----------



## pretender (Sep 18, 2007)

I agree that Contador wasn't "demonstrably superior" the way he was last year.

But he won, baby. Gritty performance today.


----------



## tinkerbeast (Jul 24, 2009)

sir duke said:


> Precisely, the result being a narrow win for Contador.


narrow win for contador : bad luck for andy :: tomatoes : tomahtoes


----------



## karatemom (Mar 21, 2008)

pretender said:


> But he won, baby. Gritty performance today.


Definitely.


----------



## philippec (Jun 16, 2002)

to the OP: repeatedly asserting a patent falsehood to be true doesn't make it so. Not in real life nor on the internet. Now stop it Frank and get back to training for the Vuelta!


----------



## barhopper (Aug 10, 2009)

sir duke said:


> Or was it because of Cadel's wrist injury, or LA's inability to stay upright, oh, Wiggo could have won it if he hadn't been so mediocre. If he coulda he woulda. You going for a 700 post thread matey? Well done both of them, it was a close tour but I can't see where Schleck was demonstrably superior in any way.




....and AC will go down in history as being one of 7 riders to win the Tour without a Stage win.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

barhopper said:


> ....and AC will go down in history as being one of 7 riders to win the Tour without a Stage win.


you know what else he will go down in history as? 
tour winner 2010 
yet another GT win.


----------



## barhopper (Aug 10, 2009)

yater said:


> He didn't dump his chain, and he didn't crash, and he was faster in the TTs, and he took that one mtn stage by 10seconds. I'm a Schleck fan, but you can't do ALL of these things and expect to win. The field waited for him once. Contador was superior....like it or not.






Given the small difference in time between these two ....... It would show AS as the more superior rider. Who else could have that many problems and still be within seconds of the leader. :thumbsup:


----------



## barhopper (Aug 10, 2009)

den bakker said:


> you know what else he will go down in history as?
> tour winner 2010
> yet another GT win.






LOL ....he can have it. He's not gaining respect and winning friends over his classless behavior, and I'm not just talking .............. this Tour. LOL


----------



## yater (Nov 30, 2006)

barhopper said:


> Given the small difference in time between these two ....... It would show AS as the more superior rider. Who else could have that many problems and still be within seconds of the leader. :thumbsup:


Too bad he's the loser, huh?


----------



## yater (Nov 30, 2006)

barhopper said:


> LOL ....he can have it. He's not gaining respect and winning friends LOL


He's winning races....BIG races. "LOL"


----------



## denversean (Jun 14, 2004)

Amazing tour for both Schleck and Contador. Great TT performance by Schleck in the TT today. I'm guessing he would like a big fat do-over for the prologue about now. Would like to see how the addition of a healthy Frank affects the mtn stages next year. Felt sorry for Sanchez today - I still hope Brunyell comes knocking on his door for next season.

This is going to be a much better rivalry than Ullrich/Armstrong ever turned out to be. More on the level of Anquetil/Poulidor, and we'll get a good decade of it.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

denversean said:


> Amazing tour for both Schleck and Contador. Great TT performance by Schleck in the TT today. I'm guessing he would like a big fat do-over for the prologue about now. Would like to see how the addition of a healthy Frank affects the mtn stages next year. Felt sorry for Sanchez today - I still hope Brunyell comes knocking on his door for next season.
> 
> This is going to be a much better rivalry than Ullrich/Armstrong ever turned out to be. More on the level of Anquetil/Poulidor, and we'll get a good decade of it.


schlecks time trial was not great by any means it was contadors that sucked. Compare with Menchov that rode in almost identical conditions.


----------



## cruso414 (Feb 20, 2004)

barhopper said:


> ....and AC will go down in history as being one of 7 riders to win the Tour without a Stage win.


he will also go down in history as the winner of the 2010 tdf by cheating. might as well put an asterick beside this win, since it was by the same margin as the ill-gotten seconds after Andy's mechanical. don't think it will be reguarded as a non-win? how many times have you seen the yellow jersey booed on the podium 2 days in a row? douche-bag-ador might have won, but I don't think he will enjoy it in the long run.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*but we may see*

a great rivalry for the future


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

InfiniteLoop said:


> Wasn't asking about runners up, only about previous winners whose win was for something other than riding.


oscar perrero taking over for floyd landis?

and alberto contador won when rasmussen got kicked out. rasmussen had AC beat.

does this answer your Q's?


----------



## cruso414 (Feb 20, 2004)

sir duke said:


> And there are whiners. The world turns, life goes on and Contador won. It's that simple.


so did the 1917 chicago black sox.:thumbsup:


----------



## 867-5309 (Oct 7, 2005)

*Brand*

What you Contador apologists are missing is that can win the race and lose the brand. Who would buy a Contador signature frame? Imagine going on a "Alberto Contador tour of the Alps"...the rule being if you get a mechanical you are left behind. Contador cannot sell his image. Schlect has huge appeal. AC will not laugh all the way to the bank.


----------



## ghost6 (Sep 4, 2009)

Alberto "Thank-God-that-Andy's-Chain-Fell-Off" Contador


----------



## yater (Nov 30, 2006)

867-5309 said:


> What you Contador apologists are missing is that can win the race and lose the brand. Who would buy a Contador signature frame? Imagine going on a "Alberto Contador tour of the Alps"...the rule being if you get a mechanical you are left behind. Contador cannot sell his image. Schlect has huge appeal. AC will not laugh all the way to the bank.


He should have lost? For the money? That'll sell bikes....


----------



## jptaylorsg (Apr 24, 2003)

cruso414 said:


> so did the 1917 chicago black sox.:thumbsup:


Uh. You mean the team that famously threw the World Series? They did not win.


----------



## Geoffersonspin (Feb 12, 2010)

What happens if there is a tie at the end for the GC? Has that ever happened?

Nevermind, 2 seconds of google/wikipedia answered my question:

In the early years of the Tour de France, the time was measured in minutes. Although usually cyclists were seconds apart, sometimes several cyclists shared the same time. In 1913, before the introduction of the yellow jersey, this had happened with the two leaders, Philippe Thys and Jean Rossius.[12]
After the introduction of the yellow jersey in 1919, the situation occurred twice more. The first time was in 1929, when even three riders had the same time when the race reached Bordeaux. Nicolas Frantz of Luxembourg and the Frenchmen Victor Fontan and André Leducq all rode in yellow, although none held it to the finish in Paris.[13][14] In 1931, the situation occurred for the second time, when Charles Pélissier and Rafaele di Paco were both leading with the same time.[15]
The problem of joint leaders was resolved by giving the jersey to whichever rider had the best daily finishing places earlier in the race. The introduction of a short time trial at the start of the race in 1967 - the prologue time trial - meant riders have since been divided by fractions of seconds recorded in that race, excepting the 2008 edition. According to the ASO rules[11]
"In the event of a tie in the general ranking, the hundredth of a second recorded by the timekeepers during the individual time trial stages will be included in the total times in order to decide the overall winner and who takes the yellow jersey. If a tie should still result from this, then the places achieved for each stage are added up and, as a last resort, the place obtained in the final stage is counted."


----------



## matchmaker (Aug 15, 2009)

Ventruck said:


> Those 31s match what was before the chain drop, simply proving AC would've at least caught Andy no matter what.
> 
> But to jump on what could be controversy over where AC started in this TT: I think the only thing he took advantage of was deciding his effort. I bet if he started earlier, he'd have gone much harder. Call me out for assumptions, but based on last year and comparing him to AS, Contador looks like he could've bested Schleck by much more than 31 seconds today.
> 
> IF any of that is indeed true, then the bigger question/controversy imo is why AC didn't challenge Menchov's time? He'll pose a much larger threat in the next stage. Whatever AC gained on him during stage 17 evaporated today.


You seem to be forgetting that Schleck was attacking and had already quite a few meters on Contador when his chain dropped. Also after he got his chain back on he rode a considerably faster ascent than Contador, he lost time because of the descent. If AS's chain did not drop, he would have taken time on Contador during that stage.

Another thing is that if Contador had been able to drop Schleck on the Tourmalet, he would surely have done it. And again, in this ITT, he would have liked to have a bigger margin to stop the controversy.

He also cried afterwards and said it had been very difficult. I derive from all these facts that this was a victory on the edge and over the thin line of chivalry within the pro peloton. Contador won on luck and astuce, nothing more.


----------



## karatemom (Mar 21, 2008)

867-5309 said:


> What you Contador apologists are missing is that can win the race and lose the brand. Who would buy a Contador signature frame? Imagine going on a "Alberto Contador tour of the Alps"...the rule being if you get a mechanical you are left behind. Contador cannot sell his image. Schlect has huge appeal. AC will not laugh all the way to the bank.


Ummm....I would buy a Contador signature frame. Thanks for assuming we all see things the way you do, though.


----------



## enac (Aug 24, 2007)

Maybe we should just blame SRAM for Schleck's Tour losing performance. SRAM should be FORCED to provide answers as to why Schleck's chain fell off at that crucial moment in the race. Schleck might be in yellow tonight had Bjarne Riis chosen to go with the clearly superior Campagnolo or Shimano brands for his Saxo-bank Team. SRAM a new reason to call Riis "Mr. 60%".


----------



## enac (Aug 24, 2007)

ghost6 said:


> Alberto "Thank-God-that-Andy's-Chain-Fell-Off" Contador



Why do you suggest that god had anything to do with reason Andy's chain came off when there are clearly better candidates to blame??? There are perfectly reasonable explanations as to why the "Chaingate" incident occurred-- without any need whatsoever to appeal to a supernatural power. How about the the team mechanic? Schleck himself, for changing gears under load? Or better yet, Sram and the "human" designers of the product that happened to FAIL at that crucial moment in the race?

Giving thanks to a god for a chain coming off in a bike race is equally as stupid as that religous troll Pat Robertson blaming the 2010 Haitian earthquake on some sort of pact with the devil when a simple understanding of plate tectonics was all that was required.


----------



## barhopper (Aug 10, 2009)

yater said:


> He should have lost? For the money? That'll sell bikes....





He most likely would have won the Tour anyway .......  
Unfortunately .........he will always be known as the guy who took advantage of a mechanical breakdown to win the Tour.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

You could also ask if anyone's ever lost the Tour by something other than their riding. 

Contador won by his superior ability to out climb, out time trial, and out shift Andy.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

enac said:


> Maybe we should just blame SRAM for Schleck's Tour losing performance. SRAM should be FORCED to provide answers as to why Schleck's chain fell off at that crucial moment in the race. Schleck might be in yellow tonight had Bjarne Riis chosen to go with the clearly superior Campagnolo or Shimano brands for his Saxo-bank Team. SRAM a new reason to call Riis "Mr. 60%".


I just saw an interview with a SRAM spokesman on VeloNews. The SRAM spokesman blames it on Andy.

He said that the chain suck/chain drop was caused by a bad choice of gears on Andy's part. Andy had the bike in a 39-12 gearing and was trying to shift under heavy load. So he was totally cross chained on the smaller cogs. This made it so the rear derailleur could not compensate fast enough during the shift, causing the chain suck and chain drop.


----------



## terry b (Jan 29, 2004)

enac said:


> Why do you suggest that god had anything to do with reason Andy's chain came off when there are clearly better candidates to blame?


I was kind of hoping that this signaled a stronger candidate between the Catholic God and perhaps one of the Reformation Gods.

But unfortunately both Spain and Luxemborg are predominately Catholic. Perhaps God felt he needed to throw a bone Alberto's way because the Spanish Inqusition was so bad?


----------



## albert owen (Jul 7, 2008)

Schleck lost the Tour through:
1 - His own poor bike skills.
2 - Contador was below par and Schleck has improved.

Schleck got close because:
1 - Cancellara organised a "go slow" to allow him to get back on.
2 - Contador was below par and Schleck has improved.

I predict that Contador will resolve his problems and beat Andy by a much larger margin in next year's Tour.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

enac said:


> There are perfectly reasonable explanations as to why the "Chaingate" incident occurred-- without any need whatsoever to appeal to a supernatural power. How about the the team mechanic? Schleck himself, for changing gears under load?


Yeah, I don't understand. It was Schleck's fault he dropped his chain. He did the same thing in the TT yesterday but only slipped his gears rather than dropping his chain.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

Apparently Andy was on a 38-12 gear and tried to shift to the 52


----------



## eric_syd (Feb 25, 2006)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Yeah, I don't understand. It was Schleck's fault he dropped his chain. He did the same thing in the TT yesterday but only slipped his gears rather than dropping his chain.


I don't know what he did in the TT but it was different.
In the TT, he was on the large chainring.
In the "chaingate", he was on a small ring-small cog crossline chain configuration when he shifted out of the saddle. I don't have a SRAM derailleur but if his chain is long enough to allow 53/25, it must be pretty loose in 39/11 or even 39/13 and it is not a surprise that the back of the derailleur blocks the chain.
Is this a mechanical problem or an operator error ?


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

867-5309 said:


> What you Contador apologists are missing is that can win the race and lose the brand. Who would buy a Contador signature frame? Imagine going on a "Alberto Contador tour of the Alps"...the rule being if you get a mechanical you are left behind. Contador cannot sell his image. Schlect has huge appeal. AC will not laugh all the way to the bank.


Is this pro cycling or pro marketing? Why don't you swap salaries with Contador and then b!tch about it.


----------



## ghost6 (Sep 4, 2009)

enac said:


> Why do you suggest that god had anything to do with reason Andy's chain came off when there are clearly better candidates to blame??? There are perfectly reasonable explanations as to why the "Chaingate" incident occurred-- without any need whatsoever to appeal to a supernatural power. How about the the team mechanic? Schleck himself, for changing gears under load? Or better yet, Sram and the "human" designers of the product that happened to FAIL at that crucial moment in the race?
> 
> Giving thanks to a god for a chain coming off in a bike race is equally as stupid as that religous troll Pat Robertson blaming the 2010 Haitian earthquake on some sort of pact with the devil when a simple understanding of plate tectonics was all that was required.


Congrats, you completely missed the point.


----------

