This no. 1 argument is way over done, I honestly believe it depends on the situation and the form the rider has at the particular event. Astana had 3 maybe even 4 possible contenders, when one showed his superiority then he becomes no. 1. Look at Wiggins /Vander Velde who?s the number 1? <?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> Had LA dropped AC on the climb to Verbier and showed consistently that he was the stronger then surely it would make sense for the team to get him to <?: prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Paris in first place. And with a team like Astana 2nd and 3rd must have always been on the cards. i don't think it is overdone. the conflicting messages and everchanging position on what armstrong and contador's roles were to be in the run-up and then during the tour is exactly the reason for my first post here: that lance cannot claim kudos for "agreeing" to help the spaniard. the team works for one man; that's the way lance and johan, then alberto and johan always rolled. It was all just a smoke screen, Alberto was always no 1. They just did it so you guys in the media would keep it the headlines The teams objectives, I believe, were 1st and then if possible 2nd and 3rd but that aint going to happen now because someone lost the plot.
