It's clear to me that Lance practices only one psychological game, and that
is one of domination. He's patient and tactically sound, be when he is
challenged and can dominate (and he usually can) he does. And that's a
smart move, too, because it's good racing to have your opponents feel they
can gain nothing by attacking you. They then begin to consider goals other
than winning GC. Why risk your place on the podium by attacking (and it is
a risk, because you may blow up and lose time) if you cant win? I recall a
few years back (details are lost because I have no memory to speak of), that
one of Lances rivals worked with Lance against another rival on a climb
instead of attacking. He was trying to preserve his 2nd or improve his 3rd
place in GC (again, cant recall), and he had no problem trading pulls up the
hill with LA. I found it particularly frustrating, not being a LA fan. If
you put a gun to my head I would say it was Pantani.
Ive seen half a dozen people here theorizing that the Discovery burnout
yesterday was some sort of tactical ploy. Great theory, except, of course,
that such a ploy would gain no psychological advantage, long or short term,
and put LA at serious risk. Lance may ride conservatively at times
(intelligently so, IMO), but he never plays possum.
steve
--
"Local firemen improvised."
Benny Hill