Tour De France 2013

[leighton]

I asked why teams didnt attack on flatish stages and thank god today Contador and his team attacked and took a whole minute and more just amazing. How Sky react to this will either make or break Froome. Great day so good.

 

[Paul Lake's Left Knee]

I asked why teams didnt attack on flatish stages and thank god today Contador and his team attacked and took a whole minute and more just amazing. How Sky react to this will either make or break Froome. Great day so good.

There is no point unless its windy as gaps are easily closed without, especially as the sprint teams want to get their men up there, OPQS today destroyed everyone and Saxo were able to take advantage, Saxo wouldnt have been able to do it without the initial push from OPQS. The effect of the wind, was seen today as soon as it entered the towns, the gaps would close and then out of town they kicked again and got away.

 

[Shands]

Stages like today are the ones that make me feel sorry for anyone who doesn't get the appeal of bike racing, they're missing out on such excitement.

 

[Rascal]

Stages like today are the ones that make me feel sorry for anyone who doesn't get the appeal of bike racing, they're missing out on such excitement.

I was expecting today to be a bunch sprint so nipped out to get some shopping :( Good job the highlights are on 7 :)

So much happened. I went and got a butty and a brew and all of a sudden Saxo had 15 seconds on Froome and it was splitting all over. Just brilliant viewing. I so wish i had got interested 30 years ago.

 

[andyhinch]

Stages like today are the ones that make me feel sorry for anyone who doesn't get the appeal of bike racing, they're missing out on such excitement.

I was expecting today to be a bunch sprint so nipped out to get some shopping :( Good job the highlights are on 7 :)

So much happened. I went and got a butty and a brew and all of a sudden Saxo had 15 seconds on Froome and it was splitting all over. Just brilliant viewing. I so wish i had got interested 30 years ago.

I was stuck in traffic and missed it all, highlights it is

 

[Paul Lake's Left Knee]

Stages like today are the ones that make me feel sorry for anyone who doesn't get the appeal of bike racing, they're missing out on such excitement.

I think it was because it looked like a transition stage, which are usually bunch sprints, that made today so special.

I agree its a shame, i feel sorry for them as well, i know some of my mates would love it if they tried but they dont want to know.

 

[malg]

Stages like today are the ones that make me feel sorry for anyone who doesn't get the appeal of bike racing, they're missing out on such excitement.

I was expecting today to be a bunch sprint so nipped out to get some shopping :( Good job the highlights are on 7 :)

So much happened. I went and got a butty and a brew and all of a sudden Saxo had 15 seconds on Froome and it was splitting all over. Just brilliant viewing. I so wish i had got interested 30 years ago.

Unfortunately a lot of those years you missed were dogged by drugs abuse, and you probably couldn't trust a lot of the results. Mountain stages were won by riders off their tits, and the Lance Armstrong revelations just about made every winner questionable. I'm sure it was Phil Liggett (?) on Talkshite last week saying that riders now look knackered when they've finished a stage, as opposed to a few years ago when they were ready to go again. Maybe the best example of that this year was when the whole Sky team (barring Froome) capitulated on the second mountain stage after putting a huge effort in the day before.

It's a much better Tour now, so you've probably got in at the right time. .

 

[Rascal]

Unfortunately a lot of those years you missed were dogged by drugs abuse, and you probably couldn't trust a lot of the results. Mountain stages were won by riders off their tits, and the Lance Armstrong revelations just about made every winner questionable. I'm sure it was Phil Liggett (?) on Talkshite last week saying that riders now look knackered when they've finished a stage, as opposed to a few years ago when they were ready to go again. Maybe the best example of that this year was when the whole Sky team (barring Froome) capitulated on the second mountain stage after putting a huge effort in the day before.

It's a much better Tour now, so you've probably got in at the right time. .

Yeah i get that mate. A read of the cycling news forum showed me how cynical some old time cycling fans are. They dont trust anything or anyone anymore and thats a shame for them i reckon. A sport they are obviously fanatical about is probably tainted for ever. So rather than enjoy Froomes attack on Aix3 they compared it to Armstrong and most agreed it must be doping. They cant trust anymore and its a dreadful shame. The next day when Team Sky fell apart they were pretty much in agreement it was planned as a cover up for the brilliance they showed the day before.

I read the stuff Shands posted earlier and i can see and understand why doubts arise and questions are posed. I dont think Sky dope at all as it would be so costly for Sky as sponsors. Imagine the fall out for Murdoch? Brailsford? Wiggins? I do believe Froome is a real athlete and great competitor yet im sure some of the pelotan will be always be trying something i think it is now almost clean. If you lose trust in what you are watching why bother watching at all.

 

[malg]

Unfortunately a lot of those years you missed were dogged by drugs abuse, and you probably couldn't trust a lot of the results. Mountain stages were won by riders off their tits, and the Lance Armstrong revelations just about made every winner questionable. I'm sure it was Phil Liggett (?) on Talkshite last week saying that riders now look knackered when they've finished a stage, as opposed to a few years ago when they were ready to go again. Maybe the best example of that this year was when the whole Sky team (barring Froome) capitulated on the second mountain stage after putting a huge effort in the day before.

It's a much better Tour now, so you've probably got in at the right time. .

Yeah i get that mate. A read of the cycling news forum showed me how cynical some old time cycling fans are. They dont trust anything or anyone anymore and thats a shame for them i reckon. A sport they are obviously fanatical about is probably tainted for ever. So rather than enjoy Froomes attack on Aix3 they compared it to Armstrong and most agreed it must be doping. They cant trust anymore and its a dreadful shame. The next day when Team Sky fell apart they were pretty much in agreement it was planned as a cover up for the brilliance they showed the day before.

I read the stuff Shands posted earlier and i can see and understand why doubts arise and questions are posed. I dont think Sky dope at all as it would be so costly for Sky as sponsors. Imagine the fall out for Murdoch? Brailsford? Wiggins? I do believe Froome is a real athlete and great competitor yet im sure some of the pelotan will be always be trying something i think it is now almost clean. If you lose trust in what you are watching why bother watching at all.

Agree 100% with all of that. I can understand why some older fans will be dubious about everything, but I firmly believe that cycling tests more than any other sport. You're spot on about Sky as well, Murdoch has built his Sky TV platform on sport, and if the Sky team were involved in drug abuse it would be a real blow for them. As for the team throwing that second stage to 'throw people off the scent' - I don't buy into that.

Just off to watch the highlights now.

 

[Paul Lake's Left Knee]

Unfortunately a lot of those years you missed were dogged by drugs abuse, and you probably couldn't trust a lot of the results. Mountain stages were won by riders off their tits, and the Lance Armstrong revelations just about made every winner questionable. I'm sure it was Phil Liggett (?) on Talkshite last week saying that riders now look knackered when they've finished a stage, as opposed to a few years ago when they were ready to go again. Maybe the best example of that this year was when the whole Sky team (barring Froome) capitulated on the second mountain stage after putting a huge effort in the day before.

It's a much better Tour now, so you've probably got in at the right time. .

Yeah i get that mate. A read of the cycling news forum showed me how cynical some old time cycling fans are. They dont trust anything or anyone anymore and thats a shame for them i reckon. A sport they are obviously fanatical about is probably tainted for ever. So rather than enjoy Froomes attack on Aix3 they compared it to Armstrong and most agreed it must be doping. They cant trust anymore and its a dreadful shame. The next day when Team Sky fell apart they were pretty much in agreement it was planned as a cover up for the brilliance they showed the day before.

I read the stuff Shands posted earlier and i can see and understand why doubts arise and questions are posed. I dont think Sky dope at all as it would be so costly for Sky as sponsors. Imagine the fall out for Murdoch? Brailsford? Wiggins? I do believe Froome is a real athlete and great competitor yet im sure some of the pelotan will be always be trying something i think it is now almost clean. If you lose trust in what you are watching why bother watching at all.

Agree 100% with all of that. I can understand why some older fans will be dubious about everything, but I firmly believe that cycling tests more than any other sport. You're spot on about Sky as well, Murdoch has built his Sky TV platform on sport, and if the Sky team were involved in drug abuse it would be a real blow for them. As for the team throwing that second stage to 'throw people off the scent' - I don't buy into that.

Just off to watch the highlights now.

Compared to football, tennis and more worrying impact sports like rugby and boxing, cycling is decades ahead in drug testing.