Search results

But so was Froome. It's all relative - Valverde attacked with everything on the last day (in Alps) and Chris (and his whole team) defended with everything. Chris (and team) wouldn't have defended as hard on previous days and Valverde wouldn't have had to attack so hard. I'm obviously not...

Well you don't sell it to him like that do you :) His chance of winning was if both him and Quintana attack. If it didn't work, Valverde could still get on the podium. I'm not suggesting they didn't work hard, everyone did, but they really worked as a team against Froome at the end, and could...

Well that's precisely my point. They could have done things differently with more information, and Froome/Sky giving information now doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

I'm not so sure. Had Movistar known how the race would pan out, I imagine they'd have attacked earlier, maybe sacrificing Valverde a little.

Is it a good idea for Froome and Sky to show their hand? I'd have thought it was better to keep quiet, and not let other teams know how much they struggled on the mountains.

4 stage wins is impressive, but I'd say Sagan, with zero wins, was pretty good competition, given that he won the green jersey. I hope we don't, that would be weird.

You're just pissed off he cost you £200. I don't blame you.

No mention for Greipel?

Unlucky Stat Bro. Bit disappointed for Cav.

Cheers

What if... They're all riding in with the peleton, ready for the sprint, and with 500m to go, Froome crashes? Quintana crosses the line at high speed, with a fast moving peleton, and it takes a little while to get Froome on another bike, he wouldn't be able to get to the line quick enough.

He's not going to win, you might as well just light a £5 note, the memory will be longer lasting.

Basically the opposite. In straight races, he's behind Quintana isn't he?

Porte is a ****ing hero!

With a team being close, you're not going to gain 30 minutes on someone, but you could still drop them from a group, and that's not considered acceptable. If that's outdated, then everyone needs to agree on it, you can't have riders playing by different rules.

I also think it's our job to show our support. Tweet the guy.

Yes I agree. If some teams have bikes that are more techy, have marginal gains, but are more susceptible to breakdowns, then it should be fair game. But I think Sky's marginal gains covers just about everything (diet, sleep, training, organisation, etc), but presumably their bikes are largely...

If Nibali had said that, then we'd be discussing what should and shouldn't happen, but Nibali said he didn't realise, so either he didn't or he's lying, and the Telegraph's point is irrelevant. But if Nibali had said the attack was on purpose, a) was the problem with Froome's bike something...

I think those are key points. If the Sky boys are tired, they should save some energy and let Valverde and Nibali take some time, and just concentrate on Quintana.

Good race. I thought it was pretty clear at the time that Nibali was deliberately going for it when Froome had a problem.