2016 Tour de France -
  • careymatt

    What made Cummings stage win even more impressive was he said that was a stage he had targeted, the break away group knew he was going to go solo at some point, and no-one could do anything about it. Massive balls, and massive confidence.

    • The man is simply a beast and it is only fair that he is in the team for the Olympics (finally)

  • Andy B

    It was a pretty great tour, beside perhaps some lack of GC fireworks a lot of big names/guys you hope to win had stage wins
    It all starts to sink in on the night after the tour is finished and you’re left craving more
    Seems to fly by, but at the same time watching highlights some of the wins feel like ages ago
    must be quite a journey for the riders

  • I think the gantry crashing onto Adam Yates deserves an honourable mention:

    • George Darroch

      Ouch, every time.

  • hornk

    >For a rouleur known for animating and then falling just short at one-day Monuments, BMC Racing’s Greg Van Avermaet unexpectedly took advantage of a hilly day to ride to glory on Stage 5

    Let’s be honest–a few days before BMC had basically sacrificed Richie Porte’s chances on GC to try this. So it wasn’t really unexpected.

  • As someone on Twitter just mentioned, this was also a pretty special moment:


  • Hazy78

    Calling Richies puncture a ‘bad mistake’ is wrong, it’s not like he decided ‘oh I might puncture now, 6kms from the finish line on a hill’. Other than that he would of been second overall and was one of the only riders that attacked.

    • Paul Gething

      The mistake was that BMC did not have any riders with Porte…….He had to wait for the car. That should never have happened.

      • Hazy78

        I can agree with that, but thats not Richies mistake but bmc who were supporting Greg in that stage instead of their best rider. Unlike sky who focus on their main rider.

        • Neal Rogers

          FWIW, I read it more referring to Porte losing 53 sec to Bardet (plus 10sec time bonus) and 27sec to Quintana and Aru on Stage 19 to Saint-Gervais Mont Blanc

  • jakub

    The “Froome’s supertuck” might have looked impressive, but it seems that the tuck itself is not that effective at all. The position apparently isn’t as aero as it seems. He got the gap already on top of the Peyresourde and most likely only maintained it, perhaps slightly extended thanks to reluctance of others to cooperate in the chase group. See here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fantastic-downhill-from-chris-froome-worth-scientific-bert-blocken

    • My real-life experience with the ‘supertuck’ does not align with the analysis of that article. The moment I get into that tuck position from any other position, I can feel the acceleration and start to pull away from other riders who aren’t in that position.

      • jakub

        Well, that’s why science isn’t based on “feel” but rather on facts ;). Your “feel” might be caused by the others being in not-so aero positions, pulling few pedal strokes before getting on the top tube, etc. Indeed, I also feel fast while descending on top tube. But handling of the bike is obviously quite limited compared to a good classic tuck on drops. I think the point is that you need to really stretch your back to get it nice flat and put your head almost on on your stem/handlebars, while still sitting on the seat to get the effect. Nibali mastered it, I hardly remember descending him on the top tube. BTW, GCN did their “science” on this and arrived to the same conclusion ;)

  • De Mac

    What can definitely be taken out of the 2016 TdF is the fact that – unequivocally – Teak Sky went in with ONE goal and one goal only – to win GC with Froome. Others went in with multiple leaders, goals, etc, ie BMC – Van Avermaet stage wins (on the stage Richie lost 1:45 thru a puncture no less), Richie vs Tejay, Astana – Aru for GC and Nibali seemingly doing whatever he wished, etc, etc…

  • Cal C

    The super tuck is not just for aerodynamics – it’s to do with his height and not crashing the bike. UCI set a maximum bike length of 1.85m, which means tall cyclists ride bikes that are too short to safely descend. The reason: their centre of mass is over the rear axle or even behind it –
    making steering really difficult. Sitting on the top tube solves this problem. Proof of this is tall cyclists will get the speed wobbles earlier than short cyclists – if they were allowed to ride bikes in proportion to their height, even with larger than 700c wheels, they would descend as easily as shorter cyclists and probably climb a bit faster too. Froome is 1.86m and 67kg. My experience being similar – 1.9m and 64kg, with that height and weight if I don’t get as far forward as possible, it doesn’t take much headwind to lift the front wheel off the ground.

  • James_Casper

    Onward and upward to the Vuelta. Like the Giro, proper racing.

    No super strong teams to make the GC a borefest. Who cares if riders are not in top notch form, ala, TdF.

    Can the average punter tell the difference between a rider climbing an ascent at 16km/h compared with 17.5km/h.

    Give me unpredictability over choreographed GC racing anyday.

    Onwards and upwards.


Pin It on Pinterest

October 22, 2016
October 21, 2016
October 20, 2016
October 19, 2016