# Did Andy get himself some balls?



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/schleck-gutted-and-disappointed-after-losing-tour-de-france



> The 25-year-old, who now rides for Leopard Trek, also said that their “hug” on the Tourmalet, several stages later, was not any kind of show of friendship, but a staged act by the Spaniard.
> 
> “I have my arm on his shoulder, but I am not doing anything. It was his way of saying, look, we are friends (….) But he knows what I think of him, and he knows that if we find ourselves in the Tour, I won't wait for mechanical trouble.”


----------



## Vee (Jun 17, 2010)

InfiniteLoop said:


> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/schleck-gutted-and-disappointed-after-losing-tour-de-france


I think the guy just doesn't want to lose again. I watched last years tour like a hawk and I was disappointed that Andy did not win. I was a little angry about the decision made by Contador to attack when Schleck had mechanical failure, but now with the doping issues I really have a bad taste in my mouth from Contador. I am sure Schleck feels this way x 1,000.


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

I bet Andy's feeling pretty good about his Tour chances this year.


----------



## jd3 (Oct 8, 2004)

Creakyknees said:


> I bet Andy's feeling pretty good about his Tour chances *LAST*year.


Fixed it for you.


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

It is funny how he is isolating the dropped chain at the reason he lost the race. Even he is forgetting the 42 second he GAVE contador in a short prolouge. That is him losing the race day one. You can't give 42 seconds in a 8.9km ITT if you have plans of winning the Tour.


----------



## wks9326 (Apr 24, 2004)

He is also forgetting the time he gained due to Contador's mechanical on the Pave. He has a bit of convenient amnesia. As far as the doping goes, do you really thing Schlek is any cleaner? Highly doubtful. He just does a better job of timing the blood withdrawals.


----------



## bnoojin (Mar 24, 2002)

*money.*



InfiniteLoop said:


> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/schleck-gutted-and-disappointed-after-losing-tour-de-france


my inner cynic says Andy's angling for the Tour prize money since it don't look so good for his "friend".

what a weenie weasel.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

if he had any balls he would have done this after the chaingate stage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFvbefsDN00


----------



## Dan Gerous (Mar 28, 2005)

Naaan, he would have whipped him with his chain...


----------



## ilmaestro (May 3, 2008)

spookyload said:


> It is funny how he is isolating the dropped chain at the reason he lost the race. Even he is forgetting the 42 second he GAVE contador in a short prolouge. That is him losing the race day one. You can't give 42 seconds in a 8.9km ITT if you have plans of winning the Tour.


You're missing the point. I'm pretty sure Conty's total margin of victory was less than he gained on Andy from the chaingate.


----------



## Dan Gerous (Mar 28, 2005)

I thought it was not a 'everybody waits' kind of mechanical if it's the rider's error. It's just like if a rider would grab his rear brake too hard, lock the wheel and skid for hundreds of meters until the tire blows up, that's not a mechanical, it's just bad riding. Andy should be pissed but not at Alberto IMO.


----------



## JohnHenry (Aug 9, 2006)

“I have my arm on his shoulder, but I am not doing anything. It was his way of saying, look, we are friends (….) But he knows what I think of him, and he knows that if we find ourselves in the Tour, I will try and remember how shifting on a bike works....I have been practicing!!”

Blaming someone else for your loss, isn't growing a set.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

ilmaestro said:


> You're missing the point. I'm pretty sure Conty's total margin of victory was less than he gained on Andy from the chaingate.


and Andy just rode away when Contador broke a spoke and had to ride with brake rub. Where was the sportsmanship then?


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

den bakker said:


> and Andy just rode away when Contador broke a spoke and had to ride with brake rub. Where was the sportsmanship then?


I hate to revisit this yet again, but there was a huge difference. As I recall it, the Cancellara/Hushovd/Schleck group tore the peloton into many pieces on pave. Conti's mechanical came much later. They dropped not just Contador, but everyone else, Armstrong, Vino, Leipheimer, etc. Rubbing brakes and broken spoke was more of an excuse to be used later - it wasn't even visibly obvious to any outside observer that Conti had any mechanical, not until the last few meters when Conti demonstratively slowed down.

In contrast, Schleck's mechanical was very much obvious to everyone - he sprinted and got a gap on Contador, with only Vino being able to follow. Then he dropped chain and basically stops dead in his tracks. Vino slows down, looking back at Andy and Contador. Contador blows past both of them. Of course we are supposed to believe him when he says he didn't realize that the guy who just dropped him was now standing still due to mechanical.

I think Contador should have either argued that he saw it and that it's all fair and he decided not to stop, OR he should have waited. I would be fine with either choice. Arguing that he *would have waited* but didn't know was a pure BS, trying to get it both ways. It seems he knew what he was doing was wrong, but couldn't afford not to get yellow jersey, at any cost. There's something fake about this.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

jd3 said:


> Fixed it for you.


that's funny. But seriously, does Andy get the title now?


----------



## Gee3 (Jan 31, 2006)

But finally speaking out about it instead of looking like a meek wuss that's all buddy, buddy with the enemy grew him a set.

You just lost the Tour and now you act like best friends?!?! That picture always sat wrong with me. I like Mario Cipollini's attitude towards his rivals and the two riders last year:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cipollini-decries-modern-cyclings-lack-of-machismo


----------



## bwhite_4 (Aug 29, 2006)

No matter how many tours A. Schleck wins in his lifetime, he'll never be a great champion. He blames losing the tour on Frank crashing out, he blames it on dropping his chain, he blames it on the belly full of anger .... the excuses and whining goes on and on. He seems like a great kid and I'm sure he'll win a tour someday on his own, but you have to put some things behind you (or at least keep quit whining in plublic about it).


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

bwhite_4 said:


> No matter how many tours A. Schleck wins in his lifetime, he'll never be a great champion. He blames losing the tour on Frank crashing out, he blames it on dropping his chain, he blames it on the belly full of anger .... the excuses and whining goes on and on. He seems like a great kid and I'm sure he'll win a tour someday on his own, but you have to put some things behind you (or at least keep quit whining in plublic about it).


Agreed. And like I said, if he ever plans on winning it he needs to figure out how not to give 42 seconds away in a prolouge. That was him failing against the clock.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

Have to admit that I am somewhat surprized by the tone here, always seemed to me that the only person more disliked on these threads than Lance was Conti. Perhaps I was mistaken.

Anyway - my first impression when reading it is why now? Perhaps because it is becoming clear that Conti will be suspended/banned ? I was not happy about Conti's choice during "Chaingate" - but Andy's sudden turn on Conti at this time seems - like weakness. Not as a rider, but as a person.

As others have noted - if you have a fire of anger in your belly and you are a competitor - then you need to live and breath that (like Cipo has suggested) - why has this been submerged for so long? If I were Andy, I would have been trash-talking Conti from chaingate forward - if not before. The timing of this is about as unsportsman-like as Conti taking advantage of Andy's shifting problem. Kind of brings Andy down in my estimation.

We may have a new winner of last year's TdF - but do we have a Champion?


----------



## olr1 (Apr 2, 2005)

Schleck = whiny little girl.

Win it or be quiet. Don't get a photo taken with Contador if you're not really his friend.

He needs some prescription medication.


----------



## bnoojin (Mar 24, 2002)

LostViking said:


> Have to admit that I am somewhat surprized by the tone here, always seemed to me that the only person more disliked on these threads than Lance was Conti. Perhaps I was mistaken.
> 
> Anyway - my first impression when reading it is why now? Perhaps because it is becoming clear that Conti will be suspended/banned ? I was not happy about Conti's choice during "Chaingate" - but Andy's sudden turn on Conti at this time seems - like weakness. Not as a rider, but as a person.
> 
> ...


agreed. "weakness as a person". before I never had many feelings about him either way (he seemed a likeable bloke) but his "fire in belly" turned into a Andy/Berto lovefest was off-putting to say the least. he's your competitor, you don't have to hate him, but it's ok to be angry and want to win and show some fire. 

I think the whole damage control was beautifully orchestrated by AC (youtube apology and hugs and grins). Andy got psychologically pawned and he didn't even realize it at the time. maybe he's starting to wake up.

then he goes on record defending Berto after his positive goes public, says he won't accept a yellow jersey but is willing to accept the 1st place prize money. what a shill. 

Andy may be not be the new Oscar P. but he's not really a Champ in caps.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

55x11 said:


> I hate to revisit this yet again, but there was a huge difference. As I recall it, the Cancellara/Hushovd/Schleck group tore the peloton into many pieces on pave. Conti's mechanical came much later. They dropped not just Contador, but everyone else, Armstrong, Vino, Leipheimer, etc. Rubbing brakes and broken spoke was more of an excuse to be used later - it wasn't even visibly obvious to any outside observer that Conti had any mechanical, not until the last few meters when Conti demonstratively slowed down.


What about the crash (Frank falling down) that helped cause the gap that Andy got?



55x11 said:


> In contrast, Schleck's mechanical was very much obvious to everyone - he sprinted and got a gap on Contador, with only Vino being able to follow. Then he dropped chain and basically stops dead in his tracks. Vino slows down, looking back at Andy and Contador. Contador blows past both of them. Of course we are supposed to believe him when he says he didn't realize that the guy who just dropped him was now standing still due to mechanical.


Conti def didn't slow down when he "saw" the chain (I seriously doubt he knew what happened just that something had) but he was already catching up. There is also something to the argument that Sammy and Dennis were the ones the kept on pushing the pace and there was no way Conti was letting them up the road. Shall we all also over look that Andy fell off (of his own accord) on stage 2 when all the other GC guys (sans CVV) did not but they all waited for him, had Astana and Cervelo ridden that day Andy would have been focused on the white jersey only from that day on, this BTW was a favor that Andy did not return on the pave when Conti was delayed by Franks fall in fact he had Cancellara (Mr everyone must wait Im the Yellow Jersey) push the pace. I actuall have no problem with what Saxo did onthe pave but I though it was BS that no one rode on day 2 and the fact that Andy keeps whinging on and on about the chain incident is just BS.



55x11 said:


> I think Contador should have either argued that he saw it and that it's all fair and he decided not to stop, OR he should have waited. I would be fine with either choice. Arguing that he *would have waited* but didn't know was a pure BS, trying to get it both ways. It seems he knew what he was doing was wrong, but couldn't afford not to get yellow jersey, at any cost. There's something fake about this.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

InfiniteLoop said:


> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/schleck-gutted-and-disappointed-after-losing-tour-de-france



No its just more after the fact whining, had he had a set he would have told Contador that he was upset on the day. In fact accepting someones apology then contiuning to whine about is the opposite of acting upfront and having a backbone, if he didn't think Contidor was sincere he should have delined the apology. The guy can ride his bike but hes a whinger.

BTW I'm no fan of Conti either


----------



## zion rasta (Aug 15, 2004)

So is Andy the 2010 winner?


----------



## penn_rider (Jul 11, 2009)

It is just another way o stir the pot. It is all about revenue, for his team, for the articles site, for future controversy. This crap sells, period. 
Never liked that image, and as a photographer I would have asked for that shot to make money on. That may have been the case here. Lots of confusing emotions after an event and good photographers prey on this to get the money shot. 
Andy is hung up on chaingate because it was a very visual and perfect timed failure. There really is nothing better to hang your losing hat on and he has a real complaint. All those other instances during that month have some sort of exit for reason, but this one does not. 
Andy is a good kid at heart, but he is just a kid and will put his foot in his mouth just as easily... Heck, I do it and I am mid 40...


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

32and3cross said:


> What about the crash (Frank falling down) that helped cause the gap that Andy got?
> 
> 
> 
> Conti def didn't slow down when he "saw" the chain (I seriously doubt he knew what happened just that something had) but he was already catching up. There is also something to the argument that Sammy and Dennis were the ones the kept on pushing the pace and there was no way Conti was letting them up the road. Shall we all also over look that Andy fell off (of his own accord) on stage 2 when all the other GC guys (sans CVV) did not but they all waited for him, had Astana and Cervelo ridden that day Andy would have been focused on the white jersey only from that day on, this BTW was a favor that Andy did not return on the pave when Conti was delayed by Franks fall in fact he had Cancellara (Mr everyone must wait Im the Yellow Jersey) push the pace. I actuall have no problem with what Saxo did onthe pave but I though it was BS that no one rode on day 2 and the fact that Andy keeps whinging on and on about the chain incident is just BS.


I have more problems that they didn't sprint on day 2 (Hushovd could have won green if they did) - when half a peloton including many major GC contenders crashes out due to slick roads, would you really want that one freak of an episode to decide the entire tour? This would make Pereiro winning the tour seem like perfect justice in comparison.

As to chain incident - it wasn't Andy's whining - it was a big deal, and in fact it was voted the #1 cycling moment of 2010 by cycling news by the way, as I just noticed.

Basically Andy loses yellow jersey and eventually the Tour, while attacking and opening the gap due to... dropped chain. I know, I know, he lost time in ITT and here and there, but that's not how it is perceived. Perception is: he has yellow one day, then drops chain, loses yellow, and Tour. This is quite dramatic and can be summarized in two frames - one moment he is attacking, the next he is stopped to put his chain back on, while other riders (you are correct, Menchov and Sanchez were part of it too) take advantage. But Contador wasn't just following Menchov, in fact he didn't need to. If he wanted to, with help of Andy and Vino who was also there the three of them would have easily reeled Menchov and Sanchez. And on other day Andy and Contador were perfectly willing to let Menchov and Sanchez go while they were doing trackstands on the mountain. They knew the real battle was between the two of them. So that was a copout too.

I am not 100% decided on whether Contador should have waited or not. Armstrong waiting for Ulrich when he crashed and Ulle/Hamilton/Mayo waiting for Armstrong during musette incident were great examples of not taking opportunistic advantage of minor bad luck to launch an attack. 

Contador could have argued that he doesn't think those unwritten rules should apply anymore, and on some level that would be fine with me.

But Contador lying about not knowing that Schleck had stopped due to mechanical is rather telling. He knew deep inside it wasn't a move of a great champion to take advantage of this incident to take yellow. 

It's all moot point now anyways.


----------



## moabbiker (Sep 11, 2002)

32and3cross said:


> There is also something to the argument that Sammy and Dennis were the ones the kept on pushing the pace and there was no way Conti was letting them up the road. .


Finally, someone who gets it. Sammy is well known to be a fierce attacking climber and downhiller who could have gained incredible time that day. We only later learned that Sammy was in poor shape so it never happened. Menchov also has the history to be an explosive rider when he believes the effort calls for it ('09 Giro for example). These two riders were serious threats for the GC during that point in time. There's no way Contador is going to slow down just to let these two get ahead, gaining a crushing blow. There are reasons the dark horse wins in races, with opportunities like these being the perfect example.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

55x11 said:


> I have more problems that they didn't sprint on day 2 (Hushovd could have won green if they did) - when half a peloton including many major GC contenders crashes out due to slick roads, would you really want that one freak of an episode to decide the entire tour? This would make Pereiro winning the tour seem like perfect justice in comparison.


Actually only Andy and CVV were not able to chase back without the pack waiting every other GC rider made it to the front group with teammates. What should have happened is Canacellara shoudl have proved what a champion he was by dropping back and pacing Andy to either bring him back or to limit losses, what we got tho was everyone waiting for Andy something he failed to do on the cobbles.



55x11 said:


> As to chain incident - it wasn't Andy's whining - it was a big deal, and in fact it was voted the #1 cycling moment of 2010 by cycling news by the way, as I just noticed.


That a readers poll that vtes on the cycling most interesting moment it meaningless as far as to what actually happened in that moment. Was it a big deal, yes. Was it equal parts Andy screwing up and a bad time and Conti being willing to not slam on brakes for him yes.



55x11 said:


> Basically Andy loses yellow jersey and eventually the Tour, while attacking and opening the gap due to... dropped chain. I know, I know, he lost time in ITT and here and there, but that's not how it is perceived. Perception is: he has yellow one day, then drops chain, loses yellow, and Tour. This is quite dramatic and can be summarized in two frames - one moment he is attacking, the next he is stopped to put his chain back on, while other riders (you are correct, Menchov and Sanchez were part of it too) take advantage. But Contador wasn't just following Menchov, in fact he didn't need to. If he wanted to, with help of Andy and Vino who was also there the three of them would have easily reeled Menchov and Sanchez. And on other day Andy and Contador were perfectly willing to let Menchov and Sanchez go while they were doing trackstands on the mountain. They knew the real battle was between the two of them. So that was a copout too.


This is wrong sorry no way Conti sits up off Menchovs wheel while Sammy (one ofthe best descenders in the pack) and Menchov (one of the best TTers) are riding hard the very idea is silly to even consider. Once Conti was there and Andy wasn't (though his own screwup) he wasn't going sit up. BTW I will point out once again Andy didn't wait after everyone waited for him why should he get a pass? And Andy does whine, he whines and whines.



55x11 said:


> I am not 100% decided on whether Contador should have waited or not. Armstrong waiting for Ulrich when he crashed and Ulle/Hamilton/Mayo waiting for Armstrong during musette incident were great examples of not taking opportunistic advantage of minor bad luck to launch an attack.
> 
> Contador could have argued that he doesn't think those unwritten rules should apply anymore, and on some level that would be fine with me.
> 
> ...


Moot, guess it depends on how you look at it, the tour is Andy's has about the same importance as the tour being Pereios.


----------



## rufus (Feb 3, 2004)

stevesbike said:


> if he had any balls he would have done this after the chaingate stage:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFvbefsDN00


What, go after him punch-slapping like a little girl?


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

In time Andy lost 39 seconds to Conti with chaingate and that's how much he lost the tour by.

With no chaingate:

- Would Andy have gained time on Conti that day instead of loosing time?
- No loss of 39 seconds plus fresher legs in following days likely make Andy winner (though Conti may have ridden differently if he was still chasing yellow in final days rather than sitting in yellow?)

With chaingate + Conti waiting:

- Likely no loss of 39 seconds but no gain either
- Andy would not have chased solo for so long and thus been fresher for future days, potentially gaining time on Conti.
- Would Mench & Sammy have eventually seen that Conti (patron? Nah, but still 2-time winner and potential winner) had waited and either chosen to themselves or been ordered to by non-banned race radios? They would have known how it would have looked if Conti had waited and they didn't.


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

If he grew some, he lost them.

Today he's saying he still considers Conti the winner. I can understand him saying that he doesn't consider himself the winner, that he wants to win on his own without controversy, etc. He could say that and still say nothing about Conti or that he doesn't consider Conti the winner because chaingate and Spanish beof taint his win just a bit too much.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

InfiniteLoop said:


> In time Andy lost 39 seconds to Conti with chaingate and that's how much he lost the tour by.
> 
> With no chaingate:
> 
> ...


Thats is you consider "chaingate" the only incident of people being delayed and waiting/not waiting. No waiting on stage 2 means Andy is, likley, not even in the picture for the GC race, Andy not waiting on the cobble stone stage (pointing out that Conti was delayed by Franks crash at the front) means he gains time on Conti. So what we have is a case of Conti waiting (with everyone else) one time and not waiting another and Anduy not waiting at all when Conti was delayed.


----------



## Gnarly 928 (Nov 19, 2005)

Would it not be really fine if we had bike racing decide a tour de france again? Always thought that was pretty cool...watching guys race, win and try again the next time without all this extra stuff being brought in to decide who is declared the ultimate winner...First guy to Paris with the lowest elapsed time wins.

Remember that stuff?


----------



## pretender (Sep 18, 2007)

Gnarly 928 said:


> Would it not be really fine if we had bike racing decide a tour de france again? Always thought that was pretty cool...watching guys race, win and try again the next time without all this extra stuff being brought in to decide who is declared the ultimate winner...First guy to Paris with the lowest elapsed time wins.
> 
> Remember that stuff?


Nope.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

32and3cross said:


> Thats is you consider "chaingate" the only incident of people being delayed and waiting/not waiting. No waiting on stage 2 means Andy is, likley, not even in the picture for the GC race, Andy not waiting on the cobble stone stage (pointing out that Conti was delayed by Franks crash at the front) means he gains time on Conti. So what we have is a case of Conti waiting (with everyone else) one time and not waiting another and Anduy not waiting at all when Conti was delayed.


Fair point. But some here would say that was different because Conti was not in yellow at the time. If something happens at the back of the race - with radios - I guess the unwritten rule would be you stop or slow down if it is a race leader who is involved - I don't believe Conti was in yellow then - therefore, no obligation to slow down and wait. Chaingate was different because Andy was in yellow at the time - and Conti was within sight of the incident - so with or without radio - he had to know the yellow jersey had a mechanical. Slowing down was the least that could be expected of Conti (esp. considering he was a TdF champion and should act as an example and leader - patron - of that race.)

The above paragraph points out what a slippery slope your on if you hold to "unwritten rules" - it's tough enough to keep the written ones!


----------



## Jwiffle (Mar 18, 2005)

I still don't see why Conti attacking Schleck when he dropped his chain is a problem, or at all unsportsmanlike. I see it as a perfectly legitimate move.

If I'm in a foot race, and your shoe lace comes untied, I should stop for you to tie it? That's ridiculous. Just like it would be ridiculous to stop for someone to put a chain back on during a bike race.

Now, if you tripped and fell during a foot race, I'll stop to help you up. Had Andy crashed, then I would think it would show sportsmanship for Conti to wait.

As far as the OP's question: Andy forgiving Conti for chaingate the next day, but whining about it now is not growing a set. If you forgive, then you need to mean it and move on. I thought he had, it had sounded like had, but suddenly he decides to take it all back.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

Jwiffle said:


> I still don't see why Conti attacking Schleck when he dropped his chain is a problem, or at all unsportsmanlike. I see it as a perfectly legitimate move.
> 
> If I'm in a foot race, and your shoe lace comes untied, I should stop for you to tie it? That's ridiculous. Just like it would be ridiculous to stop for someone to put a chain back on during a bike race.
> 
> ...


Your analogy to running does not translate. There is a rich history of not taking advantage of mishaps like these in cycling.

As to Andy's comments, perhaps I see it differently. I think he *was* angry at Contador at the time - but he controlled his emotions well. It would be the easiest thing to let it all out at the time, but probably not the smartest. Now he is on new team and can set the record straight about what happened. And why not? I don't see this as whining. If anything, he admits Contador is still a winner in his opinion (which takes a lot of class) and blames himself for not taking more time out of Contador. But the chaingate and Frank crashing out did play a major role in the race, merely not omitting these does not mean whining.


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

You're correct about stage 2, though everyone did agree to neutralize due to the oil on the descent and that was probably the right thing to do. That was a pretty extraneous thing to happen. Granted, it was Andy's teamate who organized it, but people could have told him to pound sand and race ahead.

On the pave, wasn't Conti already a ways behind when Frank went down? There's a world of difference in waiting for someone who's beside you and waiting for someone you dropped some time ago.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

32and3cross said:


> What should have happened is Canacellara shoudl have proved what a champion he was by dropping back and pacing Andy to either bring him back or to limit losses



I agree with this.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

55x11 said:


> Now he is on new team and can set the record straight about what happened. And why not? I don't see this as whining. If anything, he admits Contador is still a winner in his opinion (which takes a lot of class) and blames himself for not taking more time out of Contador. But the chaingate and Frank crashing out did play a major role in the race, merely not omitting these does not mean whining.


Actually its is whining and lame because he accepted the apology. Coming out now and saying that he thought it was unfair and that Contidor manauvered him into appearing friendly just shows what a weak willed person he is, better to keep his mouth shut and win this years tour and adjust his dealing with Conti in the future.

Sure chaingate played a part but trying to act like Andy did not contribute to it just as much as much Berto, is the rub here. Andy didn't crash, or be delayed behind a crash, didn't flat, didn't brake his chain, he mis shifted his bike because he chose a bad gear combo. He did that to himself after attacking while Berto was coming back to him (BTW just point out half of the reason Berto did not respond right away was teh fact he was boxed in, which was his own fault for position himself poorly something Andy saw and tryed to take advantage of, as he should have I remeber watching the stage it was so clear Andy wanted to attack and I kept think, wow Berto is a crappy position to cover stuff). Andy had already had Alberto wait for him once in the race, maybe Berto just said **** it I'm rolling and Im gonna keep rolling and see what happens.

Andy would do better to keep his trap shut and talk withe his legs at this point cause he is a whiner and it shows.


----------

