There are commentators and armchair critics - I'm one of them, but only 'cause it's hard to type and ride - who will critique the late attack on Passo Tonale by Cadel Evans and suggest he should have gone earlier (probably true, but we'll never know will we?), or even suggest he shouldn't have gone at all (given that the GC was pretty well locked up what was the point, apart from ensuring lesser prizes?). Others may suggest he should have made the break with Vino and Sastre (if only he had that luxury of choosing - 'I'll take that break, thanks'). But none of it really stacks up. We face similar choices every day in our own lives and base our decisions on our own value systems, feelings, skills, talents and experiences. Only Cadel can know exactly what was possible for him personally - and no-one can know what may have happened if he had chosen differently. A stage is an experiment we can run only once, isn't it?
Evans Fights Back With Late Attack | Cyclingnews.com
Evans Fights Back With Late Attack | Cyclingnews.com
Evans jumped away five kilometres from the finish and just failed to catch Johann Tschopp (Bbox Bouygues Telecom). In the final kilometre, he could see the Swiss rider ahead of him but crossed the line 15 second behind him. "I perhaps left it a little bit late. I was there and almost caught him because I could see him with just 300 metres to go," Evans said after pulling on the red points jersey over his rainbow jersey yet again. "It was a complicated situation because there were Vinokourov and Sastre in the break, then there were people going for the stage victory, and I also had to think about the points jersey because Vinokourov could have got it, and there was the overall classification too."
"I had to wait for the end because the longer you wait, the more you've got left in your legs for one last effort. Of course if you wait too long, you don’t have enough to time to pull it off. I tried to calculate things perfectly and it almost came off."
