Jul 15 2012

Tour de France

Categories:

by Comradde PhysioProffe

This shitte is fucken boring. Froome and Van Garderen (sp?) should get together and attack the fucken shitte out of Wiggins and Evans. Now thatte would be fucken exciting!!!!! Like Lemond and Hinault!!!

This post has no tag

23 comments

Skip to comment form ↓

1

slc1

July 15, 2012 at 3:58 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

Ah, the fucken Yankee fan is just out of sorts because his fucken Yankees lost this afternoon.
2

Cycloproffe

July 15, 2012 at 6:37 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

I totally agree! 80′s flashback to when the peloton had toe straps and numb toes!
3

Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber

July 15, 2012 at 11:13 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

You didn’t see the part where someone threw tacks on the road?
4

Hairy Chris, blah blah blah etc

July 16, 2012 at 4:14 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

Yeah, that incident wasn’t great. Arseholes.
5

blindrobin

July 16, 2012 at 5:03 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

Eddy Merckx will always be the best that ever was.
6

Drugmonkey

July 16, 2012 at 6:20 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

No surprise a baseball fanatic is incapable of understanding a real sporting event.
7

JB

July 16, 2012 at 7:24 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

Amazing how much more tepid racing has gotten since tests for EPO doping were developed. Turns out people *do* have bad days!
8

nightcap

July 16, 2012 at 8:00 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

I don’t understand your schtick of pretending to be illiterate and ignorant, but apparently someone finds it humorous. For the sake of those who honestly don’t understand how the Tour works, here’s the answer to your question.

Professional cycling is a team sport. Froome is Wiggins’ teammate on Team Sky. He will do everything in his power to make sure that the yellow jersey stays on Wiggins’ back. He cannot and would not form an alliance with Tejay van Garderen of Team BMC. Garderen’s job is to put his team captain Cadel Evens at the front.
9

physioprof

July 16, 2012 at 8:22 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

For the sake of those who honestly don’t understand how the Tour works, here’s the answer to your question.

1986, motherfucker. If Froome and Van Garderen had any fucken balls, they’d attack their leaders. There’s no law preventing them from doing so, and both those dudes seem to have the legs to attack and drop both Wiggins and Evans, neither of whom seem to have the capacity this year for going beyond their tempo on the climbs.

It was also very clear based on what happened at the top of the hill with the tacks on the road that Van Gerderen was totally like “Fucke Evans. I am not losing my white jersey or seventh position in the GC to wait for him here.” He claimed that the “confusion” prevented him from understanding that Evans was screaming at him to wait or hearing his DS in the earpiece telling him to wait, both of which claims were obvious bullshit.
10

nightcap

July 16, 2012 at 9:57 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

In 1986, Greg LeMond won with the assistance of his teammate, the great Bernard Hinault. According to Hinault, his aggressiveness was intended to wear down the other teams, not take the GC win for himself. (Though it is certainly true that LeMond did not see it that way.) The scene of LeMond and Hinault reaching the top of Alpe d’Huez hand-in-hand is one of the high points of the sport.

While Froome is within striking distance of the yellow, van Garderen is not (barring something nasty like more tacks). In any case, they are from two different teams and certainly cannot collude with each other to take out their leaders.

One more objection: 1986 was Hinault’s last Tour. This is Froome’s second. Attempting to take the race from Wiggins would not be a long-term winning strategy.

Relax. Wiggins might yet falter, and if he does, the second fiddle will play first violin.
11

physioprof

July 16, 2012 at 9:59 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

According to Hinault, his aggressiveness was intended to wear down the other teams, not take the GC win for himself.

I never bought this for a second.
12

physioprof

July 16, 2012 at 10:00 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

And BTW, you seem to be confusing what would make sense for Froome and/or Van Garderen to do with what would make me happy to see occur.
13

Hairy Chris, blah blah blah etc

July 16, 2012 at 10:06 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

One more objection: 1986 was Hinault’s last Tour. This is Froome’s second. Attempting to take the race from Wiggins would not be a long-term winning strategy.

Relax. Wiggins might yet falter, and if he does, the second fiddle will play first violin.

Yeah, if he tried anything he wouldn’t get another ride, period, as he’d be seen as not a team player and the whole thing would be terribly bad form.

If he stays at #2 there’s a fair chance that another team will poach him for team lead next year, plus he’s there in case anything happens to Wiggins. There are always accidents, one of which did for Wiggins last year, but with Team Sky dominating the peleton it’s easier for Wiggins to be kept our of trouble at the front…
14

davidmc

July 16, 2012 at 11:07 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

Even if Froome and Van wotsis name, did take the lead against team orders, they could be sacked and sent home. its irrelevant anyway, neither could take the time out of Wiggins they would require to keep the lead come the Time Trial.
15

BikeMonkey

July 16, 2012 at 2:49 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

Hinault was a craven sack of shit in 86 and clearly Lemond should have hammered him in 85 instead of playing the loyal teammate. Fucking french.
16

physioprof

July 17, 2012 at 5:37 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

Yeah, and the real battle in 1986 was a kajillion times more entertaining than the loyal teammate snoozefest of 1985. All this obeying the team leader crappe is fucken stultifying.
17

BikeMonkey

July 18, 2012 at 9:28 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

So you are anti-radio then?
18

BikeMonkey

July 18, 2012 at 9:31 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

Of course the good thing about Hinault being a dickweed in 86 is that nobody could say LeMond only won by agreement. He was clearly the better rider that year. In 85, Hinault’s win has to be tainted by the knowledge LeMond had to let him win.
19

BikeMonkey

July 18, 2012 at 9:33 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

p.s., Cadel faltered in stage 16…GO TEJAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
20

Jim B

July 18, 2012 at 1:04 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

The move I was hoping to see happen was Evans would find his legs and gap Froome/Wiggens. As the gap grew, it would force Froom’s hand: stay with Wiggens and watch Evans read into the lead (although he would likely lose it in the later TT anyway), or would Froome protect his own interests and leave Wiggens behind?

Alas, we got the most boring option.
21

physioprof

July 18, 2012 at 1:08 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

That could also have happened if the Italian dude who attacked from the group of three (Wiggins, Froome, Italian dude) had enough juice to get a real gap on Wiggins and Froome. But yeah, fucken boring.

Maybe tomorrow the Italian dude (now in third place) will join forces with Vandenbroucke (in fourth) to put the hammer down on Wiggins/Froome? But no, these fuckers are so conservative in their strategy/tactics that the Italian will probably make some kind of fucken deal with Wiggins/Froome just to solidify his third place podium position instead of doing something ballsy.
22

Drugmonkey

July 18, 2012 at 1:14 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

When’s the last time any baseball team ever did something “ballsy” ? Just curious.
23

Petra Mleczko

December 14, 2012 at 11:58 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

I think that this is one of the most helpful observations on the subject i have stumbled upon in quite a long time. Its obvious that you have got a considerably better understanding of this particular subject in contrast to most people and this has made it fairly simple for individuals such as me to grasp a great deal more of many of the current debate that had been in circulation .

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

:)