OK, it’s finally on. Le Tour 2007. I’m sure there are some jokers in the pack that will remain hidden until weeks 2 and 3 but for now who’s looking good on day one, the prologue?

The winner was prologue and TT specialist and current World TT champ Fabian Cancellara with a 13 second gap on overall contender Andreas Kloden. It’s hard to imagine Kloden making that time up when the first week is pretty much dominated by the sprinters. He may nibble away at the lead with time bonuses, however. George Hincapie was next and will have the same problem as Kloden. Converted trackie Bradley Wiggins has some hope of chasing yellow but is also largely out of it now – just too far back. After Wiggins we have Gusev, Karpets and, back 30 seconds, Kloden’s team-mate and contender Alexandre Vinokourov.

Vino is well placed to grab yellow in the Alps during week 2, if he wants it, but may sit back and wait for the Pyrenees. He will rise up the GC as the TT specialists fall back during weeks 1 and 2, so there’s no panic. Dekker, Quinziato and first Frenchman Benoît Vaugrenard may have some hope if an escape takes them away in week 2. Vaugrenard may have July 14th in mind…

Zabriskie disappointed, and will have to hang on grimly from here. Then comes Gutierrez, a similarly disappointing David Millar (to be fair the prologue doesn’t suit him as much as a longer TT), a surprising Mikel Astarloza – well positioned to climb up the GC in weeks 2 and 3 – and Alberto Contador. Similarly, Contador has a good platform for a GC assault when we get to the pointy bits. Then comes Velasco, Kashechkin and finally first Aussie and noted climber and longer-TT specialist Cadel Evans, back just 36 seconds. Evans is also well poised to climb up the GC in week 2 and perhaps make a play for the lead in the Pyrenees. He likes the HC climbs – the tougher the better – and may well give the likes of Vino and Kloden some hurry-up in week 3.

Also within a minute of the lead are Bonnet and Chavanel, so expect some July 14th fireworks from those two Frenchmen. Next is multiple World TT Champ and 2nd Aussie, Michael Rogers, followed by last year’s 2nd place getter, maybe even 1st if Landis loses his title, Oscar Pereiro. Oscar won’t be given the gift he got last year but it’s good to see him so high up and ahead of several contenders. He has a point to prove. Both he and Rogers will rise up GC in week 2.

Notably we have climber and rapid descender Paolo Savoldelli at 39 secs, and contender Levi Leipheimer uncomfortably well behind the likes of Kloden and Vino, and with a smaller gap to Evans, Rogers and Pereiro. He’d like to be closer, I’m sure, but it’s a long race and anything can happen. He looks top 10 at this stage.

Denis Menchov will be looking to improve as well at 40 secs back. After whom comes the first sprinter and former Green-jersey winner, Thor Hushovd at 41 secs. Too far back to take yellow, surely? If he wins every sprint in Week 1 he’ll do it, but that’s a big ask. He’ll stand a great chance fo taking green again if he’s consistent. Pozzato is close behind and interestingly placed, then Markus Fothen and contender Alejandro Valverde. Surely Valverde will need wings to make it past Kloden, Evans et al? He is supported by Pereiro, of course, or is he supporting Oscar?

Sprinter Daniele Bennati will have the same issues as Hushovd but is better placed than the electrifying Tom Boonen. Tom has something to prove, though, and will be looking to seize the day – or days – in the coming week. He’ll be fired up. Petacchi’s lead-out man and next Aussie Brett Lancaster was slightly disappointing in 42nd place – but presumably will be leading Zabel out in Petacchi’s absence.

There are climbers and escape artists galore within a minute of the lead, of which any of them could mount a raid in weeks 2 or 3 and take yellow. Schleck, Popovych, Mayo and Zubeldia stand out but Merckx and Vasseur will have a go for sure. Chris Horner had a good ride too and can be expected to support Cadel Evans strongly in the mountains.

McEwen is just over the minute mark and really couldn’t expect to grab yellow, but will look to get wins and be consistently placed in the green jersey comp. Freire is slightly ahead of him on GC and will be chasing the same goal, as will Hushovd and Boonen.

So a few surprises, but no suprise in Cancellara taking out the day’s prize. He will be looking to keep yellow during week 1 by staying on the sprinters’ collective wheel… before Kloden, Vino, Evans, Rogers, Leipheimer and Valverde take it up on the climbs.. with Pereiro looking to prove himself a worthy “winner” too it should be an interesting and wide-open race with some intriguing tactics developing in week 2.

OK, it’s finally on. Le Tour 2007. I’m sure there are some jokers in the pack that will remain hidden until weeks 2 and 3 but for now who’s looking good on day one, the prologue?

The winner was prologue and TT specialist and current World TT champ Fabian Cancellara with a 13 second gap on overall contender Andreas Kloden. It’s hard to imagine Kloden making that time up when the first week is pretty much dominated by the sprinters. He may nibble away at the lead with time bonuses, however. George Hincapie was next and will have the same problem as Kloden. Converted trackie Bradley Wiggins has some hope of chasing yellow but is also largely out of it now – just too far back. After Wiggins we have Gusev, Karpets and, back 30 seconds, Kloden’s team-mate and contender Alexandre Vinokourov.

Vino is well placed to grab yellow in the Alps during week 2, if he wants it, but may sit back and wait for the Pyrenees. He will rise up the GC as the TT specialists fall back during weeks 1 and 2, so there’s no panic. Dekker, Quinziato and first Frenchman Benoît Vaugrenard may have some hope if an escape takes them away in week 2. Vaugrenard may have July 14th in mind…

Zabriskie disappointed, and will have to hang on grimly from here. Then comes Gutierrez, a similarly disappointing David Millar (to be fair the prologue doesn’t suit him as much as a longer TT), a surprising Mikel Astarloza – well positioned to climb up the GC in weeks 2 and 3 – and Alberto Contador. Similarly, Contador has a good platform for a GC assault when we get to the pointy bits. Then comes Velasco, Kashechkin and finally first Aussie and noted climber and longer-TT specialist Cadel Evans, back just 36 seconds. Evans is also well poised to climb up the GC in week 2 and perhaps make a play for the lead in the Pyrenees. He likes the HC climbs – the tougher the better – and may well give the likes of Vino and Kloden some hurry-up in week 3.

Also within a minute of the lead are Bonnet and Chavanel, so expect some July 14th fireworks from those two Frenchmen. Next is multiple World TT Champ and 2nd Aussie, Michael Rogers, followed by last year’s 2nd place getter, maybe even 1st if Landis loses his title, Oscar Pereiro. Oscar won’t be given the gift he got last year but it’s good to see him so high up and ahead of several contenders. He has a point to prove. Both he and Rogers will rise up GC in week 2.

Notably we have climber and rapid descender Paolo Savoldelli at 39 secs, and contender Levi Leipheimer uncomfortably well behind the likes of Kloden and Vino, and with a smaller gap to Evans, Rogers and Pereiro. He’d like to be closer, I’m sure, but it’s a long race and anything can happen. He looks top 10 at this stage.

Denis Menchov will be looking to improve as well at 40 secs back. After whom comes the first sprinter and former Green-jersey winner, Thor Hushovd at 41 secs. Too far back to take yellow, surely? If he wins every sprint in Week 1 he’ll do it, but that’s a big ask. He’ll stand a great chance fo taking green again if he’s consistent. Pozzato is close behind and interestingly placed, then Markus Fothen and contender Alejandro Valverde. Surely Valverde will need wings to make it past Kloden, Evans et al? He is supported by Pereiro, of course, or is he supporting Oscar?

Sprinter Daniele Bennati will have the same issues as Hushovd but is better placed than the electrifying Tom Boonen. Tom has something to prove, though, and will be looking to seize the day – or days – in the coming week. He’ll be fired up. Petacchi’s lead-out man and next Aussie Brett Lancaster was slightly disappointing in 42nd place – but presumably will be leading Zabel out in Petacchi’s absence.

There are climbers and escape artists galore within a minute of the lead, of which any of them could mount a raid in weeks 2 or 3 and take yellow. Schleck, Popovych, Mayo and Zubeldia stand out but Merckx and Vasseur will have a go for sure. Chris Horner had a good ride too and can be expected to support Cadel Evans strongly in the mountains.

McEwen is just over the minute mark and really couldn’t expect to grab yellow, but will look to get wins and be consistently placed in the green jersey comp. Freire is slightly ahead of him on GC and will be chasing the same goal, as will Hushovd and Boonen.

So a few surprises, but no suprise in Cancellara taking out the day’s prize. He will be looking to keep yellow during week 1 by staying on the sprinters’ collective wheel… before Kloden, Vino, Evans, Rogers, Leipheimer and Valverde take it up on the climbs.. with Pereiro looking to prove himself a worthy “winner” too it should be an interesting and wide-open race with some intriguing tactics developing in week 2.

It was a big sprint win by Alessandro Petacchi who stormed into Milano, launched by his team to victory. And Danilo DiLuca did everything right to take the overall Giro win. It was a fascinating contest with some memorable wins by not just these 2 riders but the Saunier Duval team as well. All up, a great Giro. But no pointer to Le Tour, really. Petacchi will have to back up after a big effort of finishing a Grand Tour, whilst Boonen (injured, but back with a win in the Tour of Belgium) and McEwen (having retired before the Giro’s big mountain stages) have been taking it relatively easy in the last week or so and will inevitably be a little fresher. And the big TdeF GC guns are still hidden away…

It was a big sprint win by Alessandro Petacchi who stormed into Milano, launched by his team to victory. And Danilo DiLuca did everything right to take the overall Giro win. It was a fascinating contest with some memorable wins by not just these 2 riders but the Saunier Duval team as well. All up, a great Giro. But no pointer to Le Tour, really. Petacchi will have to back up after a big effort of finishing a Grand Tour, whilst Boonen (injured, but back with a win in the Tour of Belgium) and McEwen (having retired before the Giro’s big mountain stages) have been taking it relatively easy in the last week or so and will inevitably be a little fresher. And the big TdeF GC guns are still hidden away…

Interesting quote here at VeloNews. “Frankly, if the rest of the peloton was clean, Ullrich would have won the Tour de France at least 10 times,” D’Hont said.

Now he also said that Ullrich had taken EPO, so I guess this is very hypothetical. But is he saying that if Ullrich had been clean, and everyone else, that Ullrich would have won 10 times?

Frankly it rings true for me. Does anyone remember how good Jan was at the start of his pro career? I do – he was unbelievably good before he rode Le Tour – and clearly a Tour-rider, not a classics-rider in the making (although he was talented enough to do well there if he wanted). So what he achieved in his career was pretty well consistent- no sudden rise to the top – well OK, he did fabulously well at his first TdF – but generally it was obvious that he was someone who could climb, TT and race day after day. He was ‘in the mould’, as it were, of the past greats. Now is that always true? I guess not, and it proves nothing about those who suddenly converted from OK to above-average classics-rider to stunning Tour rider – but it does make one wonder.

Interesting quote here at VeloNews. “Frankly, if the rest of the peloton was clean, Ullrich would have won the Tour de France at least 10 times,” D’Hont said.

Now he also said that Ullrich had taken EPO, so I guess this is very hypothetical. But is he saying that if Ullrich had been clean, and everyone else, that Ullrich would have won 10 times?

Frankly it rings true for me. Does anyone remember how good Jan was at the start of his pro career? I do – he was unbelievably good before he rode Le Tour – and clearly a Tour-rider, not a classics-rider in the making (although he was talented enough to do well there if he wanted). So what he achieved in his career was pretty well consistent- no sudden rise to the top – well OK, he did fabulously well at his first TdF – but generally it was obvious that he was someone who could climb, TT and race day after day. He was ‘in the mould’, as it were, of the past greats. Now is that always true? I guess not, and it proves nothing about those who suddenly converted from OK to above-average classics-rider to stunning Tour rider – but it does make one wonder.

OK, no-one is seriously surprised that Riis doped in ’96 to win the Tour, are they? He didn’t have to come clean, but he – like Zabel and Aldag – at least have the decency to admit their mistakes. The problem now is who should be declared winner of ’96? Ullrich was 2nd, and although he hasn’t admitted anything it would be a brave TdF organisation that would declare Ullrich the winner, surely.

OK, no-one is seriously surprised that Riis doped in ’96 to win the Tour, are they? He didn’t have to come clean, but he – like Zabel and Aldag – at least have the decency to admit their mistakes. The problem now is who should be declared winner of ’96? Ullrich was 2nd, and although he hasn’t admitted anything it would be a brave TdF organisation that would declare Ullrich the winner, surely.

Yes, I reckon it is. We have stars who have tested positive – whether they have admitted it or not, they have been caught out in tests – and we can’t ourselves see inside their minds, so we must rely instead on the tests. Basso is just the latest. At least he admits it, or admits considering it, even if he didn’t actually do it. Millar did it, admitted to it, copped the suspension and came back. Hamilton? Well he admits nothing but did his time. Landis – probably the highest profile of the lot, given that it was all so public – denies it all. Pantani? Well his was the cruelest blow – to be in sight of the win and have it snatched away. Armstrong? Well if you believe the French papers anything is possible, but there is no real evidence. Anyway, the list is too long and you know it already.

Now I’d like to think they are all innocent and that it’s all done in error – but that seems a forlorn hope. Maybe some errors were made – and maybe there is some truth in some of the conspiracy theories. But not all. I know from my own amateur racing career that some riders popped caffeine pills and some visited gymnasiums for reasons other than weightlifting. And some got upset when they got “the wrong banana” at race end. Whatever. It’s a tough sport, we all want to get through it without too much pain and without too many injuries, and we all want to win. So we are all tempted to greater or lesser degrees to “aid” our recovery after hard training, to “assist” our return after injury and to do “what it takes” to win. It’s human nature to cheat, as humans are cunning and deceptive creatures, and it takes a great deal of willpower to resist temptation, no matter what that temptation may be. When it appears that the culture of this sport – or any sport, and I think some are in this same boat – is biased toward “assistance”, we have a problem.

I think we still have a problem. What do you reckon?

Yes, I reckon it is. We have stars who have tested positive – whether they have admitted it or not, they have been caught out in tests – and we can’t ourselves see inside their minds, so we must rely instead on the tests. Basso is just the latest. At least he admits it, or admits considering it, even if he didn’t actually do it. Millar did it, admitted to it, copped the suspension and came back. Hamilton? Well he admits nothing but did his time. Landis – probably the highest profile of the lot, given that it was all so public – denies it all. Pantani? Well his was the cruelest blow – to be in sight of the win and have it snatched away. Armstrong? Well if you believe the French papers anything is possible, but there is no real evidence. Anyway, the list is too long and you know it already.

Now I’d like to think they are all innocent and that it’s all done in error – but that seems a forlorn hope. Maybe some errors were made – and maybe there is some truth in some of the conspiracy theories. But not all. I know from my own amateur racing career that some riders popped caffeine pills and some visited gymnasiums for reasons other than weightlifting. And some got upset when they got “the wrong banana” at race end. Whatever. It’s a tough sport, we all want to get through it without too much pain and without too many injuries, and we all want to win. So we are all tempted to greater or lesser degrees to “aid” our recovery after hard training, to “assist” our return after injury and to do “what it takes” to win. It’s human nature to cheat, as humans are cunning and deceptive creatures, and it takes a great deal of willpower to resist temptation, no matter what that temptation may be. When it appears that the culture of this sport – or any sport, and I think some are in this same boat – is biased toward “assistance”, we have a problem.

I think we still have a problem. What do you reckon?

What can I say that I can’t display?

Here are some more images for you to ponder… firstly, one from Brett Lyons (a scanned 35mm shot) from the route of the 2006 Tour de France. It’s a good landscape shot, with the mountain looming and the road leading you… and your eyes… from the foreground to the background. It’s deceptively plain but draws you in. I like it. Second, some colour from my garden (using the Nikon D50 and demonstrating how some out-of-focus foreground can lift the subject out of the background ) and lastly a tiny sunflower that stands out nicely from the darker background.

What can I say that I can’t display?

Here are some more images for you to ponder… firstly, one from Brett Lyons (a scanned 35mm shot) from the route of the 2006 Tour de France. It’s a good landscape shot, with the mountain looming and the road leading you… and your eyes… from the foreground to the background. It’s deceptively plain but draws you in. I like it. Second, some colour from my garden (using the Nikon D50 and demonstrating how some out-of-focus foreground can lift the subject out of the background ) and lastly a tiny sunflower that stands out nicely from the darker background.

We can’t we just do it right? Why does every move that could ‘prove’ Landis innocent – or guilty – have to be tarnished with suspicion, doubt and intrigue? Today we seemingly have L’Equipe reporting on the unreleased results of the USADA’s test of the previously untested TdeF B-samples. (The respective A-samples were negative, only stage 17 came out with an inappropriate epitestosterone ratio.) Whilst we are fascinated to learn that some of these show synthetic testosterone, it’s disappointing that we are yet again reading a leak. Why can’t we see results released in a proper, controlled way? It gets worse. The Landis legal team has claimed that their UCLA independent witness was denied access during at least some of the tests. If true, why allow access sometimes and not at other times? Why immediately throw the tests into doubt by excluding an independent observer? Why would you do that?

You could blame L’Equip. They could indeed show more restraint. But we don’t shoot the messenger, do we? You could blame the leaker – he or she could also just act appropriately and resolve the matter. But they are only human. You could blame me – and yourselves – too, for wanting to know so badly that we have created the very demand that makes leaking worthwhile. But (if true) how do you explain the subterfuge involved in excluding the observer? Why does it have to be this hard?

Cyclingnews reports here and the Sydney Morning Herald has more.

We can’t we just do it right? Why does every move that could ‘prove’ Landis innocent – or guilty – have to be tarnished with suspicion, doubt and intrigue? Today we seemingly have L’Equipe reporting on the unreleased results of the USADA’s test of the previously untested TdeF B-samples. (The respective A-samples were negative, only stage 17 came out with an inappropriate epitestosterone ratio.) Whilst we are fascinated to learn that some of these show synthetic testosterone, it’s disappointing that we are yet again reading a leak. Why can’t we see results released in a proper, controlled way? It gets worse. The Landis legal team has claimed that their UCLA independent witness was denied access during at least some of the tests. If true, why allow access sometimes and not at other times? Why immediately throw the tests into doubt by excluding an independent observer? Why would you do that?

You could blame L’Equip. They could indeed show more restraint. But we don’t shoot the messenger, do we? You could blame the leaker – he or she could also just act appropriately and resolve the matter. But they are only human. You could blame me – and yourselves – too, for wanting to know so badly that we have created the very demand that makes leaking worthwhile. But (if true) how do you explain the subterfuge involved in excluding the observer? Why does it have to be this hard?

Cyclingnews reports here and the Sydney Morning Herald has more.

Interesting report in Cyclingnews today…about Bjarne Riis and allegations about EPO and other drug use in 1996… now I won’t say what I don’t know but Riis did do very well that year (especially in Le Tour) and held his young lieutenant (Ullrich) back in 2nd place. Riis was 7th the following year (Ullrich 1st) and retired shortly thereafter, I recall, having never reached the top step again; although his more recent days as team CSC boss has brought some vicarious podium glory. Riis had a string of high placings previously, including back in the Indurain days.

Anyway, here’s the piece from CN… can you tell me what he (reportedly) didn’t say?

Riis responds to doping allegations

Team CSC boss Bjarne Riis has brushed off allegations from former Team Telekom soigneur Jef D’hondt that he used EPO and other doping products to win the 1996 Tour de France. The allegations were made on Belgian TV program Panorama on Sunday evening and claimed, among other things, that “Riis had a hematocrit of 64 at one time during the Tour,” caused by the use of EPO.

“I have never had a particularly close relation with Jef D’hondt and he has no validation for the allegations he is making,” said Riis in a statement released on Monday evening. “There will always be someone out there trying to make money by talking about the past and in my opinion that is probably what he is trying to do here.

“This is probably not the first nor the last time these kinds of stories surface,” he continued. “To me, it’s all in the past and I do not wish to be held accountable every time someone finds it interesting to bring up some ten-year-old story. I truly believe the future is much more important than the past. I want to be judged on the work I’m doing with my team today, and the results we achieve – that is what’s important to me.”

Interesting report in Cyclingnews today…about Bjarne Riis and allegations about EPO and other drug use in 1996… now I won’t say what I don’t know but Riis did do very well that year (especially in Le Tour) and held his young lieutenant (Ullrich) back in 2nd place. Riis was 7th the following year (Ullrich 1st) and retired shortly thereafter, I recall, having never reached the top step again; although his more recent days as team CSC boss has brought some vicarious podium glory. Riis had a string of high placings previously, including back in the Indurain days.

Anyway, here’s the piece from CN… can you tell me what he (reportedly) didn’t say?

Riis responds to doping allegations

Team CSC boss Bjarne Riis has brushed off allegations from former Team Telekom soigneur Jef D’hondt that he used EPO and other doping products to win the 1996 Tour de France. The allegations were made on Belgian TV program Panorama on Sunday evening and claimed, among other things, that “Riis had a hematocrit of 64 at one time during the Tour,” caused by the use of EPO.

“I have never had a particularly close relation with Jef D’hondt and he has no validation for the allegations he is making,” said Riis in a statement released on Monday evening. “There will always be someone out there trying to make money by talking about the past and in my opinion that is probably what he is trying to do here.

“This is probably not the first nor the last time these kinds of stories surface,” he continued. “To me, it’s all in the past and I do not wish to be held accountable every time someone finds it interesting to bring up some ten-year-old story. I truly believe the future is much more important than the past. I want to be judged on the work I’m doing with my team today, and the results we achieve – that is what’s important to me.”

It’s only March, nowhere near July, yet… I can’t help but speculate on form.

Let’s look at the Paris Nice final GC:
1 Alberto Contador (Spa) Discovery Channel 29.55.22
2 Davide Rebellin (Ita) Gerolsteiner 0.26
3 Luis León Sánchez (Spa) Caisse d’Epargne 0.42
4 Tadej Valjavec (Slo) Lampre-Fondital 0.49
5 Franco Pellizotti (Ita) Liquigas 0.57
6 David López García (Spa) Caisse d’Epargne 1.00
7 Cadel Evans (Aus) Predictor-Lotto 1.01
8 Fränk Schleck (Lux) Team CSC 1.08
9 Samuel Sánchez (Spa) Euskaltel-Euskadi 1.12
10 Joaquím Rodríguez (Spa) Caisse d’Epargne 1.22
11 Alexandre Botcharov (Rus) Crédit Agricole 1.29
12 Sébastien Joly (Fra) Française Des Jeux 1.36
13 David Millar (GBr) Saunier Duval-Prodir 1.46
14 Jérôme Pineau (Fra) Bouygues Telecom
15 Patxi Vila (Spa) Lampre-Fondital 2.10

What can we say? Disco look strong, with multiple stage winners on song and not only several GC contenders but a GC winner as well. Hmmm. Too early in the season, or just demonstrating their options for July?

Evans looks strong in what must be just his first race of the year (is it?). Great work in the mountains and 7th overall. Hmmmm. Without really trying? Schleck also looks ominously good for similar reasons, as does Millar for that matter.

Contador is obviously flying, and Disco clearly have some stars that can pace themselves throughout the season. Rebellin is getting back to the form we know he can achieve, so expect a big result soon. Ahhh, so easy to speculate, so hard to do.

CN reports on Paris-Nice here and BTW Pez has a nice set of pics on that similarly important form-guide, Tirreno Adriatico.

It’s only March, nowhere near July, yet… I can’t help but speculate on form.

Let’s look at the Paris Nice final GC:
1 Alberto Contador (Spa) Discovery Channel 29.55.22
2 Davide Rebellin (Ita) Gerolsteiner 0.26
3 Luis León Sánchez (Spa) Caisse d’Epargne 0.42
4 Tadej Valjavec (Slo) Lampre-Fondital 0.49
5 Franco Pellizotti (Ita) Liquigas 0.57
6 David López García (Spa) Caisse d’Epargne 1.00
7 Cadel Evans (Aus) Predictor-Lotto 1.01
8 Fränk Schleck (Lux) Team CSC 1.08
9 Samuel Sánchez (Spa) Euskaltel-Euskadi 1.12
10 Joaquím Rodríguez (Spa) Caisse d’Epargne 1.22
11 Alexandre Botcharov (Rus) Crédit Agricole 1.29
12 Sébastien Joly (Fra) Française Des Jeux 1.36
13 David Millar (GBr) Saunier Duval-Prodir 1.46
14 Jérôme Pineau (Fra) Bouygues Telecom
15 Patxi Vila (Spa) Lampre-Fondital 2.10

What can we say? Disco look strong, with multiple stage winners on song and not only several GC contenders but a GC winner as well. Hmmm. Too early in the season, or just demonstrating their options for July?

Evans looks strong in what must be just his first race of the year (is it?). Great work in the mountains and 7th overall. Hmmmm. Without really trying? Schleck also looks ominously good for similar reasons, as does Millar for that matter.

Contador is obviously flying, and Disco clearly have some stars that can pace themselves throughout the season. Rebellin is getting back to the form we know he can achieve, so expect a big result soon. Ahhh, so easy to speculate, so hard to do.

CN reports on Paris-Nice here and BTW Pez has a nice set of pics on that similarly important form-guide, Tirreno Adriatico.

Interesting take here on whether Floyd really needed any super-powers to do what he did on that fateful stage, from the BikeBiz website. Of course it wasn’t super-human, plenty of riders before him have successfully broken away from a peleton and gained the types of advantages quoted, what’s more important in the Landis situation is his co-incidental drug-test positive on that same stage. I think most people now agree that the alleged drug abuse would not have given him more than just a mental kick, if indeed he knowingly took the drug, which of course he denies. Only Landis, or perhaps some conspirators somewhere, really know the truth. Anyway, here’s the quote:

“And on the CycleOps website, Dr Lim has an explanation of why the stage 17 victory by Floyd Landis in the 2006 Tour de France was not “super-human” or fuelled by testosterone but was well within typical power outputs of Landis and had a lot to do with tactical errors from the peleton and the fact Landis could take on board more water than the chasers.

Lim said: “What is very interesting about the [power] data from the climbs is that it shows that Floyd gained much of his time on the field not on the climbs but on the descents. He’s well known as the most talented descender in the pro peleton, and he definitely put on a clinic on S17.

‘Because of the direct and immediate feedback from the power meter, Floyd came to an immediate and extraordinarily important realization during his ride — that every time he poured ice cold water on his body, his power output went up.’”

Interesting take here on whether Floyd really needed any super-powers to do what he did on that fateful stage, from the BikeBiz website. Of course it wasn’t super-human, plenty of riders before him have successfully broken away from a peleton and gained the types of advantages quoted, what’s more important in the Landis situation is his co-incidental drug-test positive on that same stage. I think most people now agree that the alleged drug abuse would not have given him more than just a mental kick, if indeed he knowingly took the drug, which of course he denies. Only Landis, or perhaps some conspirators somewhere, really know the truth. Anyway, here’s the quote:

“And on the CycleOps website, Dr Lim has an explanation of why the stage 17 victory by Floyd Landis in the 2006 Tour de France was not “super-human” or fuelled by testosterone but was well within typical power outputs of Landis and had a lot to do with tactical errors from the peleton and the fact Landis could take on board more water than the chasers.

Lim said: “What is very interesting about the [power] data from the climbs is that it shows that Floyd gained much of his time on the field not on the climbs but on the descents. He’s well known as the most talented descender in the pro peleton, and he definitely put on a clinic on S17.

‘Because of the direct and immediate feedback from the power meter, Floyd came to an immediate and extraordinarily important realization during his ride — that every time he poured ice cold water on his body, his power output went up.’”

Clean-rider philosophy aside (good though that is) T-Mobile has one hell of a good squad this year. Both male and female teams are packed with talent. With tour-riders and TTers like Rogers and Gonchar, sprinters like Ciolek… it’s a big, strong team. The women’s team is also impressive with riders like Wood, Rhodes, Arndt… wow. Also interesting is the new management and support staff like Alan Peiper. Pencil T-Mobile in for some success in ’07.

Clean-rider philosophy aside (good though that is) T-Mobile has one hell of a good squad this year. Both male and female teams are packed with talent. With tour-riders and TTers like Rogers and Gonchar, sprinters like Ciolek… it’s a big, strong team. The women’s team is also impressive with riders like Wood, Rhodes, Arndt… wow. Also interesting is the new management and support staff like Alan Peiper. Pencil T-Mobile in for some success in ’07.