Vino gaining 19 seconds

Right, the managers of T-Mobil were probably incredibly
upset with Vino, because they wanted him to save his
strength to ride a hard but very even tempo up mountain climbs
so Ullrich wouldn't lose too much time to Armstrong and get
a record of 2nd place finishes.

-ilan

David Ferguson a écrit :

Quoted message said:

As I stated above, it wasn't worth the risk, in my opinion, to even
respond to that "attack" considering the conditions and route. Not to
mention that without the wreck he would have been reeled in and
sprinted back to 10th.

However, one thing that might actually work to the disadvantage for
Vino and TMO is that it brings the "who's the team leader" issue even
more to the front. Going from 15 seconds ahead of Jan to 34 seconds
ahead isn't exactly helping Jan solidify his position.

D

Lol. You're funny.

What an issue it really does have to be for them.

You know Vino is thinking "heck, if second is all were going to get I
want it to be me".

Jannie lost that slot to a TMO last year so I expect Vino would just
as soon have it.

D

Quoted message said:

Right, the managers of T-Mobil were probably incredibly
upset with Vino, because they wanted him to save his
strength to ride a hard but very even tempo up mountain climbs
so Ullrich wouldn't lose too much time to Armstrong and get
a record of 2nd place finishes.

-ilan

David Ferguson a écrit :

Quoted message said:

As I stated above, it wasn't worth the risk, in my opinion, to even
respond to that "attack" considering the conditions and route. Not to
mention that without the wreck he would have been reeled in and
sprinted back to 10th.

However, one thing that might actually work to the disadvantage for
Vino and TMO is that it brings the "who's the team leader" issue even
more to the front. Going from 15 seconds ahead of Jan to 34 seconds
ahead isn't exactly helping Jan solidify his position.

D

David Ferguson wrote:
<snip>

Quoted message said:

However, one thing that might actually work to the disadvantage for
Vino and TMO is that it brings the "who's the team leader" issue even
more to the front.

I see how this works to Jan's disadvantage but it's all to TMO and
Vino's favor.

Jan is past his prime. Following wheels is not going to beat Lance.
Vino has panache, he is the only one in the race that has a strategy
that has a chance to win, but I am not sure his body is up to it. It
would be a shame if they made Vino sacrifice himself for Ullrich.

Joel said:

Vino has panache,

<snip>

Dumbass -

That is a very serious accusation. I hope you have justification for
it.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

"David Ferguson" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

However, one thing that might actually work to the disadvantage for
Vino and TMO is that it brings the "who's the team leader" issue even
more to the front. Going from 15 seconds ahead of Jan to 34 seconds
ahead isn't exactly helping Jan solidify his position.

I really don't understand this kind of reasoning. Trolling against it won't
help, I concede. Ofcourse it's good for T-Mobile if Vinokourov gains time.
The race is about gaining time, so if he does that, it's good. There is no
leadership problem in T-Mobile, just as Saeco had no leadership problem in
last years' giro. In 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004, the team Mercatone Uno had a
single leader for whom the riders would do anything short of sacrificing
their lives. In 2000, they switched leadership halfway during the race.
Guess which giro they won, Einstein.

Supporting the strongest rider in the team is good. If Ullrich fails and
Vinokourov is better, then it is smart of the other riders, including
Ullrich, to ride for Vinokourov. The riders on this team know eachother and
they get along. Even if Guerini would win, they'd all be thrilled.

At the same time, if Armstrong failed miserably and Popovych was doing much
better, Discovery would switch leaders, too. They're just counting on it
that that isn't going to happen. T-Mobile cannot afford that luxury. But
it's not such a big deal: all they have to do is not sacrifice Vinokourov,
which won't be too difficult, since the pressure is on Discovery to set the
pace in the mountains.

This 'T-mobile has a leadership problem' is the biggest [censored] I've read here
since tj from az asked how he could ride the tour.

Finally someone said it.

KEnny

Jonathan v.d. Sluis said:

"David Ferguson" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

However, one thing that might actually work to the disadvantage for
Vino and TMO is that it brings the "who's the team leader" issue even
more to the front. Going from 15 seconds ahead of Jan to 34 seconds
ahead isn't exactly helping Jan solidify his position.

I really don't understand this kind of reasoning. Trolling against it won't
help, I concede. Ofcourse it's good for T-Mobile if Vinokourov gains time.
The race is about gaining time, so if he does that, it's good. There is no
leadership problem in T-Mobile, just as Saeco had no leadership problem in
last years' giro. In 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004, the team Mercatone Uno had a
single leader for whom the riders would do anything short of sacrificing
their lives. In 2000, they switched leadership halfway during the race.
Guess which giro they won, Einstein.

Supporting the strongest rider in the team is good. If Ullrich fails and
Vinokourov is better, then it is smart of the other riders, including
Ullrich, to ride for Vinokourov. The riders on this team know eachother and
they get along. Even if Guerini would win, they'd all be thrilled.

At the same time, if Armstrong failed miserably and Popovych was doing much
better, Discovery would switch leaders, too. They're just counting on it
that that isn't going to happen. T-Mobile cannot afford that luxury. But
it's not such a big deal: all they have to do is not sacrifice Vinokourov,
which won't be too difficult, since the pressure is on Discovery to set the
pace in the mountains.

This 'T-mobile has a leadership problem' is the biggest [censored] I've read here
since tj from az asked how he could ride the tour.

As I said before, having two leaders isn't a problem if they are both
dominatin (Hinault & LeMond) but whether you want to admit it or not
the rest of the riders of TMO lay there at night thinking that one or
the other should be the team's focus. That is not a postive thing. Not
a debilitating thing and I never suggested it was. But It doesn't help
morale.

D

"Tim Mullin" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Jonathan v.d. Sluis" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Supporting the strongest rider in the team is good. If Ullrich fails and
Vinokourov is better, then it is smart of the other riders, including
Ullrich, to ride for Vinokourov. The riders on this team know eachother
and they get along. Even if Guerini would win, they'd all be thrilled.

At the same time, if Armstrong failed miserably and Popovych was doing
much better, Discovery would switch leaders, too. They're just counting
on it that that isn't going to happen.

That scenario has been previously proposed here. I couldn't disagree more
strongly. Discovery is all about LANCE! winning the TdF, and no one else.

And

Quoted message said:

that's their weakness. CSC is about someone working for Bjarne winning.
Telekom is about some guy in pink winning. Does Discovery have other guys
capable of winning? To be sure. But they're all going to be working for
LANCE!, so that ain't going to happen. The other teams should realize

this,

Quoted message said:

and attack, attack, attack. Hit him like they're crack [censored], and he's a
pinata full of rock. If you take Popovych or Savoldelli [did I spell it
right, Ken?] along for the ride, who cares? Because the very next day,
they'll be back, working for LANCE!, fetching his bottles, and trying to

drag

Quoted message said:

him back into contention. Because that's what they're there for.

Don't think it will work? It's got a much better chance than what they've
been trying the last few years.

You mean that when Heras crashed out during the TTT, they waited for him
because he was such an invaluable time-trialist? Because obviously they
didn't need a reserve leader if the team wouldn't even consider the
possibility supporting anyone but Armstrong.

Even Armstrong can get sick or crash out.

"David Ferguson" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Jonathan v.d. Sluis said:

"David Ferguson" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

However, one thing that might actually work to the disadvantage for
Vino and TMO is that it brings the "who's the team leader" issue even
more to the front. Going from 15 seconds ahead of Jan to 34 seconds
ahead isn't exactly helping Jan solidify his position.

I really don't understand this kind of reasoning. Trolling against it

won't

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

help, I concede. Ofcourse it's good for T-Mobile if Vinokourov gains

time.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The race is about gaining time, so if he does that, it's good. There is

no

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

leadership problem in T-Mobile, just as Saeco had no leadership problem

in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

last years' giro. In 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004, the team Mercatone Uno

had a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

single leader for whom the riders would do anything short of sacrificing
their lives. In 2000, they switched leadership halfway during the race.
Guess which giro they won, Einstein.

Supporting the strongest rider in the team is good. If Ullrich fails and
Vinokourov is better, then it is smart of the other riders, including
Ullrich, to ride for Vinokourov. The riders on this team know eachother

and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

they get along. Even if Guerini would win, they'd all be thrilled.

At the same time, if Armstrong failed miserably and Popovych was doing

much

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

better, Discovery would switch leaders, too. They're just counting on it
that that isn't going to happen. T-Mobile cannot afford that luxury. But
it's not such a big deal: all they have to do is not sacrifice

Vinokourov,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

which won't be too difficult, since the pressure is on Discovery to set

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

pace in the mountains.

This 'T-mobile has a leadership problem' is the biggest [censored] I've read

here

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

since tj from az asked how he could ride the tour.

As I said before, having two leaders isn't a problem if they are both
dominatin (Hinault & LeMond)

Yeah, Pantani was really dominatin' in the 2000 giro.

Quoted message said:

...but whether you want to admit it or not
the rest of the riders of TMO lay there at night thinking that one or
the other should be the team's focus. That is not a postive thing.

What, you mean it might make them ride harder?

Quoted message said:

Not
a debilitating thing and I never suggested it was. But It doesn't help
morale.

If the whole team was 5+ minutes back, that would be bad for morale.
Vinokourov gaining 19 seconds is not.

You know, I've noticed something odd: on the one hand Ullrich is criticized
for not being motivated enough, but at the same time it is assumed his
morale will be devastated should his good friend and teammate Vinokourov
perform well. If Ullrich really doesn't have that drive to win (and it has
to be said that he takes defeat quite well) then why would his morale suffer
if T-Mobile finally is able to do what the team has been trying for the last
six years? Ullrich thought it was fine when Riis won, he has worked for
Zabel in the sprint stages before Paris and there is nothing that suggests
he will be shattered if Vinokourov does better than him.

The only thing that would be damaging is this: if Klöden and Vinokourov have
to work for Ullrich when he is obviously inferior in his performance, then
they won't be too happy about it. But guess what - that would only be the
case if Ullrich was the sole leader no matter what! Just think about the
messages we'd be posting if Vinokourov was pulling Ullrich when actually
leading the German minutes in the GC. Clear leadership then, but what good
would it do?

"Jonathan v.d. Sluis" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:9d8d1$42cff640
[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

You mean that when Heras crashed out during the TTT, they waited for him
because he was such an invaluable time-trialist?

Nope.

Quoted message said:

Even Armstrong can get sick or crash out.

Correct. But until that happens, it is still LANCE!s team. Waiting for Heras
didn't cost them any time he couldn't help them make up in the mountians. If
they thought otherwise--even in the slightest--Heras would have been left
along the french roadside like so much medical waste.

in 470110 20050709 172454 Tim Mullin said:

"Jonathan v.d. Sluis" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:9d8d1$42cff640
[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

You mean that when Heras crashed out during the TTT, they waited for him
because he was such an invaluable time-trialist?

Nope.

Quoted message said:

Even Armstrong can get sick or crash out.

Correct. But until that happens, it is still LANCE!s team. Waiting for Heras
didn't cost them any time he couldn't help them make up in the mountians. If
they thought otherwise--even in the slightest--Heras would have been left
along the french roadside like so much medical waste.

That doesn't make sense. Heras would have been available in the mountains
whether they waited for him in the ITT or not. It only makes sense if you see him
as the reserve leader.

Bob Martin <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Correct. But until that happens, it is still LANCE!s team. Waiting for
Heras didn't cost them any time he couldn't help them make up in the
mountians. If they thought otherwise--even in the slightest--Heras would
have been left along the french roadside like so much medical waste.

That doesn't make sense. Heras would have been available in the
mountains whether they waited for him in the ITT or not. It only makes
sense if you see him as the reserve leader.

What doesn't make sense about that? I agreed he is a reserve leader. I just
don't think they would take any _substantial_ risk to protect anyone other
than LANCE!. And remember, they didn't just wait for Heras, but Vandevelde,
who was important to their TTT effort. Also, consider that there were still
at some 25 rainly kilometers to go. Dropping two riders that far out might
not be the best idea. I don't think the the decision was as simple as, "Hey
gang, let's wait for Roberto!"

"Jonathan v.d. Sluis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
[...]

Quoted message said:

You know, I've noticed something odd: on the one hand Ullrich is

criticized

Quoted message said:

for not being motivated enough, but at the same time it is assumed his
morale will be devastated should his good friend and teammate Vinokourov
perform well. [...]

Speaking of Ulrich, he looked pretty strong going up the climb. With
everybody
talking him down, he's in a great place to surprise the field. And his team
is strong.
Though Vino isn't riding like he wants to be a domestique.

Another 600 and he might actually have a shot at winning...too bad
there aren't enough stages to do it.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Tim Mullin said:

Bob Martin <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Correct. But until that happens, it is still LANCE!s team. Waiting for
Heras didn't cost them any time he couldn't help them make up in the
mountians. If they thought otherwise--even in the slightest--Heras would
have been left along the french roadside like so much medical waste.

That doesn't make sense. Heras would have been available in the
mountains whether they waited for him in the ITT or not. It only makes
sense if you see him as the reserve leader.

What doesn't make sense about that? I agreed he is a reserve leader. I just
don't think they would take any _substantial_ risk to protect anyone other
than LANCE!. And remember, they didn't just wait for Heras, but Vandevelde,
who was important to their TTT effort. Also, consider that there were still
at some 25 rainly kilometers to go. Dropping two riders that far out might
not be the best idea. I don't think the the decision was as simple as, "Hey
gang, let's wait for Roberto!"

I believe it is very typical for there to be a TTT contingency plan by
most teams before the start of the stage: under what circumstances you
wait for or drop a rider. So the rule for Discovery is probably
something like "nobody gets dropped for fitness in the first half or for
a mechanical or crash in the first 3/4; the hill-climbers can be dropped
in the last 1/4 for any reason, Hincapie or Savoldelli in the last 5 km,
and Lance can only be dropped by a crash in the last 1 km."

The nightmare scenario is to be a mid-grade TTT team on the run-up to
the finish when your GC hopeful suffers a minor non-crash issue which
causes him to be gapped from the 5th-place rider. Then the team would
get the handicap time, and he would get his true time.

This is a good reason why team leaders should ride at the front at the
end of a TTT.

One good reason not to drop Heras 25 km from the finish? That leaves a
fairly good chance he could have been time cut DQ'd.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos