Early Tour Favorite

El Loto

The rumour mill is suggesting Denis might do the Giro and the Tour.

Lack of TT will hurt Kloedi, my first obvious pick. I think Cunego is THE great outside bet.

Danilo Di Intravenous?

__________________

Frigo's Luggage

I don't think DiLuca has what it takes to win the Tour no matter what is in his IV bag. The Tour is a couple notches tougher than the Giro. He can't climb or time trial with the best.

__________________
We are all made of stars.

El Loto

However he can handle himself in one dayers like Damiano. I reckon the French would love to see Di Luca turn up to Brittany.

__________________

earth_dweller

really why?

eta: duh, you were sarcastic.

note to self: drink a lot of coffee before reading CF

El Loto

My 2009 favourite is Vino for sure. Or maybe Floyd.

__________________

Crankyfeet

Flandis vs. Vino vs. Contadope in 2009? Let's throw Rasmussen in for good measure. What a spectacle that would be. Like Tyson vs. Holyfield vs. Lennox. Someone will get their ear bitten off. Hannibal Landis.

__________________

Frigo's Luggage

How about Ullrich in 2009...all 110 kilos of him.

__________________
We are all made of stars.

Bro Deal

I think I have lost faith in Menchov. He doesn't have what it takes to win the TdF.

__________________
"You are like the wind and I like the lion. You form the tempest. The sand stings my eyes and the ground is parched. I roar in defiance but you do not hear. But between us there is a difference. I, like the lion, must remain in my place. While you like the wind will never know yours." -- Mulay Hamid El Raisuli, Lord of the Riff, Sultan to the Berbers, Last of the Barbary Pirates

donrhummy

I think as the "cleaning out" (note: not cleaning UP) of cycling continues, I think we're going to see a return to domination by the young guys. So, I'd say the next few years are going to see more victories by the Schlecks, Contadors, Solers, Cunegos and other under 28 guys. It'll take a couple of years and more career ruining for the older guys but I think that's where it's headed.

Scotttri

I dont necasarily agree. Alot of endurance events across sports are won by athletes in there late 20's early 30's

Bro Deal

I think donrhummy is largely right. With less doping a couple of years will be shaved off the tail end of rider's careers.

__________________
"You are like the wind and I like the lion. You form the tempest. The sand stings my eyes and the ground is parched. I roar in defiance but you do not hear. But between us there is a difference. I, like the lion, must remain in my place. While you like the wind will never know yours." -- Mulay Hamid El Raisuli, Lord of the Riff, Sultan to the Berbers, Last of the Barbary Pirates

Crankyfeet

I kinda disagree here. I think most men don't physically peak until 25-30 years of age. And at 33 or so, they are by no means over-the-hill. Maybe there will be less guys in their late 30's, without PED's. In other sports, guys would normally peak around 30 as this would be the best combination of physical attributes and the psychological advantages of experience. After 34-35, your body's exponential physical decline starts to kick in, and you also battle with the mental challenge of retaining your enthusiasm for new challenges in the sport that has been your whole life to that point.

The other point is that unless a miracle happens, PED's will still be able to be taken without much risk of detection. Older riders IMO have three factors that increase the chances that they will take that risk (and hence have an advantage over a clean younger rider):

1. They have less to lose if they are caught because they have less years remaining in the sport than a younger rider.

2. They have more incentive to cash-in during the final few years of their career.

3. They have more experience at doping and have more knowledge of connections and support within cycling to do it.

__________________

Drongo

I recall seeing an analysis of the average age of GT winners up to the 80s, and then seeing the recent trend. What it showed was that in the old days, riders used to win/podium GTs by their early-mid 20s. Some of them kept on doing well well past that time (eg Poulidor) but the point is that they'd already won or come close at an early age.

Riis, Armstrong, even Indurain are relatively unusual in winning for the first time after their mid-20s (Riis later still, of course). You could add di Luca to that mix, although he did win the baby Giro beforehand.

The same thing happened in athletics--suddenly men in their early 30s were winning sprint races (Christie, for example) which was unheard of. Some sports are better suited to slightly older blokes (eg a front row forward in rugby) but I think the grand tours don't (or ought not) penalise youth.

I'm not saying that a young GT winner is clean (Berzin, anyone? Ullrich?) but I think the average age of GT winners will come down again.

Crankyfeet

That is based on the assumption that all riders are drug-free, which wasn't really my assumption. But there are a lot of other reasons why sportsmen were younger in the past. And the major one was that there was less money in sports before - and as men thought about marriage and starting families, a lot of them retired from sports at younger ages than today and took up longer term careers. A sport that I played semi-professionally for example, cricket, had top players retiring in their early thirties in the mid-eighties. Now, the top players are able to go to almost 40 because the money is there.

The examples you cite, like Linford Christie, are fair, and I think reflect a situation where an athlete comes into a new PED program at an older age which has dramatic effects on their performance.

In an ideal world, where all PED's are out of cycling, I agree with the point that younger riders will be more advantaged than they are at present.

__________________