I'm a newbie to following professional cycling; enjoying the hell out of it, but I've got a question. At the end of the Versus coverage of the Greenville race, which Levi Leipheimer won, they interviewed George Hincapie, who said something to the effect of "I had the legs to win today, but couldn't use them because I had to be a team player."
Now, does that mean that Discovery instructed Hincapie not to go for the win, but rather to ride mainly in support of Leipheimer?
And then, of course, Hincapie wins the Tour of Missouri, and other than taking the time trial, Levi isn't a huge factor. Was it Levi's turn to be a team player and forego an assault on the podium in favor of aiding a Hincapie win?
It would make sense, I'd think, for Discovery to actively work to get as many of their team onto the podium as possible in a given season, rather than to have one "golden boy" bask in all the glory.
This is the first season I've taken an active interest in following professional cycling, and it seems that teamwork and strategy play a far greater role than I'd ever thought.
Now, does that mean that Discovery instructed Hincapie not to go for the win, but rather to ride mainly in support of Leipheimer?
And then, of course, Hincapie wins the Tour of Missouri, and other than taking the time trial, Levi isn't a huge factor. Was it Levi's turn to be a team player and forego an assault on the podium in favor of aiding a Hincapie win?
It would make sense, I'd think, for Discovery to actively work to get as many of their team onto the podium as possible in a given season, rather than to have one "golden boy" bask in all the glory.
This is the first season I've taken an active interest in following professional cycling, and it seems that teamwork and strategy play a far greater role than I'd ever thought.