Armstrong leader of Astana at TDF

[Leopejo]

I'm not saying that there is clearly no purpose behind the Astanas numbers but at the same time there is no positive proof that there is in fact intent behind it.

Besides, even if there were a purpose, it could be some other purpose than being the designated leader. What about "most recognized rider in the team"?

 

[Angliru]

Some teams choose to list cyclists alphabetically but the common practice is for the leader to be identified by wearing the number 1. My point, for those astute enough to understand it, was that, surely as one of the great alpha males of sport, Armstrong wearing the 1 sends a message (subliminal or intentional, take your pick) to his opponents and members of his own team with pretensions to leadership. Or it's just alphabetical for those of you who like things simple.

bianchigirl its also possible that Leipheimer, with all the giddy schoolgirl like love and admiration that he has for Armstrong, couldn't bring himself to even imagining wearing the number 1, and possibly insisted that, in an effort to show reverence to Armstrong, that Armstrong should wear it. Maybe the alphabetical factor is merely coincidental. Of course Armstrong with his massive ego could not decline the offer nor argue against it since it feeds the monster within.

In addition it could have been a matter of Bruyneel and Armstrong, being the decision makers for Astana, deciding there would be less pressure on Leipheimer if Armstrong wore the #1. Some teams, as I undertand it, do it alphabetically to show they are a united TEAM, with no stars. Garmin and Columbia appear to follow this philosophy on occasion.

 

[SpeedWay]

what a joke. I am belittling merckx? He is a hero of mine - he is class. Following cycling since 1982, i understand the rich history of the euro scene, and could not have more respect for the long line of my cycling heros. the issue is more about the fact that you continuously pound lance in such a sophomoric and tiresome manner that you are becoming a bore. Read back through your posts.

You were wrong about lance's fitness - you will be wrong in the event that bertie is the stronger of the two. But please continue to issue your proclamations.

I am a lance fan, but he is far from my favorite rider (cav, vdv, many others).

becoming??? You feed the trolls, dissociation occurs, and it becomes a hate fest. Be nice if they would just stick to their HATE thread someone created for them but they can't help themselves - they're not in control.

 

[bianchigirl]

Gosh Speedway, that certainly advanced the debate

ingsve, I take your point but would you not concede that, as Angliru points out, Armstrong is a master manipulator and probably the greatest player of mind games in the pro peloton (not a criticism all you thin skinned acolytes - surely you remember 'the Look' and the bluff that preceded it?). There's very little that he does - be it tweets or videos or press releases - that aren't meticulously thought through. He is probably the most fascinating athlete in any sport in terms of the way he uses psychological weapons so effectively.

 

[tifosa]

There are teams in the pro peloton, when their accomplishments are discussed, I say to myself, "Sure, but that doesn't change the fact that I cannot stand their organization."

There are riders in the pro peloton, when their accomplishments are discussed, I say to myself, "Sure, but that doesn't change the fact that he's an ***."

There are forum users, when their posts are responded to--or when someone responds to their posts, I say to myself, "WTF are they prattling on about? If only these people were getting paid to publish their opinions. Oh, that's right, opinions are like assholes--everyone has them and I haven't been paid yet!" and, "If only we could get these forum users into a cage to battle it out amongst themselves. Holy crap! I might even pay to watch! Hell, I'd be the ****ing referee! Now that would be something fun!", and "If they gave out "Post Pimp" and "Post Prostitute" awards at the "Internet Forum Follies", would the winners show in person to receive it, or would they just text it in? Would their acceptance speeches be cut off by the swell of the orchestra or would someone have to push "play" on the iPod? Would the winners wear their cycling kits complete with helmets? Oh, but then there's that whole helmet-head after-party issue...", and the comments continue until I go out for a ride when suddenly my head is filled with thoughts of, "I feel great! I'm riding my bike. Nothing else that happens today, with the exception of some mind-blowing spectacular meal or the orgasm of my life, will top this.", and "Holy Mother of God! This climb is ****ing killing me! You have GOT to lose 5 pounds, like yesterday!", and "Did I remember to lock the garage? ****!!!"

 

[ingsve]

Gosh Speedway, that certainly advanced the debate

ingsve, I take your point but would you not concede that, as Angliru points out, Armstrong is a master manipulator and probably the greatest player of mind games in the pro peloton (not a criticism all you thin skinned acolytes - surely you remember 'the Look' and the bluff that preceded it?). There's very little that he does - be it tweets or videos or press releases - that aren't meticulously thought through. He is probably the most fascinating athlete in any sport in terms of the way he uses psychological weapons so effectively.

Yes, of couse Armstrong has a record of being manipulative but I can't go around thinking that everything he does is a mind game. That's just a little too cynical for my taste. If it somehow could be proven that it was calculation behind their numbers then I wouldn't be surprised but without proof I can't always believe the worst.

 

[lookkg386]

His mind games seemed to be aimed at those who would fall for it, eg. Ullrich - without doubt Jan was mentally fragile (especially later on) and Lance new that - surely the mind games are part of the sport.

 

[jaylew]

Simply stated, Merckx retains the record for most stage wins (though he rode fewer Tours) and most days in the MJ. He also did the Double 3 times, won the Triple Crown and would have won all three GTs in 1973 (he also won Paris-Roubaix, L-B-L, Ghent-Wevelgem when the race was longer than it is today and Amstel Gold) except he was asked politely not to race the TdF. He also won all 3 jerseys in his first attempt at the race.

I can't believe I'm about to stick up for Lance but:

Why are you bringing up all this stuff that isn't pertinent to the discussion? It doesn't matter how many stages were won or how many total grand tours, or doubles, or other classics. Sure, if Eddy had had the singular focus that Lance had for the Tour maybe he would have had more wins, but he didn't.

And that's without looking at the relative quality of the opposition that Merckx and Armstrong faced

Good thing you didn't do that. It wouldn't help your cause.

It's moronic to try to compare athletes from different eras anyway. It just doesn't work - sport changes too much too quickly.

 

[jaylew]

(BTW, I met Tom Simpson when I was 4, saw my first TdF stage a year later, have helped organise regional championships and hosted stagiaires when I lived in France and reported for the original cycling news way back when - does this entitle me to an opinion on pro cycling? )

I guess about as much as when you said Allan Davis was one of 10 credible GC candidates for the Giro.

 

[Belokki]

Simply stated, Merckx retains the record for most stage wins (though he rode fewer Tours) and most days in the MJ. He also did the Double 3 times, won the Triple Crown and would have won all three GTs in 1973 (he also won Paris-Roubaix, L-B-L, Ghent-Wevelgem when the race was longer than it is today and Amstel Gold) except he was asked politely not to race the TdF. He also won all 3 jerseys in his first attempt at the race.

And that's without looking at the relative quality of the opposition that Merckx and Armstrong faced but perhaps you'd care to make that comparison for yourself, 53x11?

You see, sometimes its not about the quantity but about the sheer quality and class of the accomplishment. Stating that Merckx is the greatest TdF rider has nothing to do with a rather puerile concept of 'hatred' and everything to do with an understanding of the quality of racing historically, the longer and more punishing parcours and the length of the season that Merckx raced. Once you have made the comparisons for yourself, you'll begin to understand that belittling Merckx's extraordinary achievements makes you look sadly uninformed about the sport at best.

I'd be very surprised if an alpha dog like Armstrong ever submitted to riding concertedly for the glory of another rider.

So what?! Chipolini won over 40 giro stages but that doesn't make him the best ever in giro history! It's the end game that count... Lance won 7 editions of the Tour, Merckx 5... end of story...

 

[bianchigirl]

Highly unlikely that I mentioned Davis as a credible candidate for the Giro as I tend not to get involved in the tipster game - I'm a well known KoDer

Besides, on paper, Davis is a credible GC candidate - at least Manolo Saiz thought so who said Davis was the next great all rounder in the Jalabert mould. On paper, many riders can do well in a race or are GC contenders - whether they fulfil their promise or not when the parcours gets underway is another matter.

I'd also argue whether it's 'moronic' to compare the riders of Merckx's era with those of Armstrong's - an interesting debate to be had about developments in the sport versus the 'old days' and one that doesn't even touch on the D word, perhaps, but not for this forum, enjoyable as it is.

But enough self justification - I agree that the number of years spent involved in a sport doesn't confer all knowing wisdom but it might in some cases confer civility, something all too many posters on this forum lack.

 

[BikeCentric]

So what?! Chipolini won over 40 giro stages but that doesn't make him the best ever in giro history! It's the end game that count... Lance won 7 editions of the Tour, Merckx 5... end of story...

Well Cipo is the best sprinter in Giro history, perhaps the best sprinter in history period (definitely one of them). So what are you trying to say? GC guys usually don't win a ton of stages, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to compare sprinters to GC riders.

 

[Belokki]

Well Cipo is the best sprinter in Giro history, perhaps the best sprinter in history period (definitely one of them). So what are you trying to say? GC guys usually don't win a ton of stages, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to compare sprinters to GC riders.

Sprinters win stages, GC guy's win stage races! Alfredo Binda won 41 stages, Cipo 42, Cipo considered the best ever! Lance 7 > 5 Merckx follow the logic.. Can't explain it in a simpler way sorry

 

[BroDeal]

Sprinters win stages, GC guy's win stage races! Alfredo Binda won 41 stages, Cipo 42, Cipo considered the best ever! Lance 7 > 5 Merckx follow the logic.. Can't explain it in a simpler way sorry

Armstrong used EPO to change his potential. That is like a marathon runner skipping part of the course by taking a taxi. A win like that is worth nothing.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

+1 to Bianchigirl.

 

[Anonymous]

Armstrong used EPO to change his potential.

What contemporaries of Armstrong didn't?

If everyone changed their potential then the one with the greatest potential still won, right?

 

[53x11 in DC]

Armstrong used EPO to change his potential. That is like a marathon runner skipping part of the course by taking a taxi. A win like that is worth nothing.

So Merckx was clean? Oh, that's right, somebody tampered with his urine sample. Conspiracy.

If you were around in the early 70's, I'm guessing you'd have been a Merckx hater for how people like him sullied the sport by using PED's.

Arrrrrrrggghhhhhhh!!!!!

 

[Belokki]

Armstrong used EPO to change his potential. That is like a marathon runner skipping part of the course by taking a taxi. A win like that is worth nothing.

Merckx had more dope in his blood than blood!! Even a great sprinter has "only" about 200+ victories (Petachi, Zabel, Cipollini)! To get over 535 victories I must say he was the biggest cheat of all!

 

[hfer07]

Contador says:

For the Tour de France though, the Tour of Italy is the ideal race for him to polish up his condition. Really, though, the Giro is just one step for Lance. The big one is the Tour. As for how far Lance can go there, it's certainly possible he could be stronger than me, and if he is, I'm prepared to work for him.

But the hierarchy inside Astana is something we're deciding as the race goes on. If we get to the big climbs like Mont Ventoux, and we still don't know who's leader for the Tour, the team will be in big trouble.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/others/cycling-can-lance-armstrong-ride-high-again-1687699.html

I believe that statement responses any conspiracy theories summoned around here.
In my view, AC has the upper hand ---he's on schedule in training & already checking the key stages in the tour, while LA is RIDING to shape up, keeping in mind the recovery he needs after the Giro & paying its toll, just to realize that he has a month's load of training to compete in his never-done-before 2nd Grand Tour in the same year-nonetheless the TDF

 

[BikeCentric]

Merckx had more dope in his blood than blood!! Even a great sprinter has "only" about 200+ victories (Petachi, Zabel, Cipollini)! To get over 535 victories I must say he was the biggest cheat of all!

There was no blood doping when Merckx rode.

 

[BroDeal]

Merckx had more dope in his blood than blood!! Even a great sprinter has "only" about 200+ victories (Petachi, Zabel, Cipollini)! To get over 535 victories I must say he was the biggest cheat of all!

Lance Fanbys are so funny. They just cannot stand their guy taking EPO fundamentally changed what he was capable of, so they lash out at other riders. Well, they lash out when they are not making the ridiculous claim that all dope is the same so it does not matter what Armstrong took.

 

[Anonymous]

Lance Fanbys are so funny. They just cannot stand their guy taking EPO fundamentally changed what he was capable of, so they lash out at other riders. Well, they lash out when they are not making the ridiculous claim that all dope is the same so it does not matter what Armstrong took.

Lance isn't "my guy" by any means, but one needs to at least glance at reality.

The reality is that almost all of Lance's contemporaries were busted for dope, while he was not.

Now, he indeed may have been on EPO in '99, but the evidence is non-condemning, so it's at best a maybe.

He also may have been on something undetectable, but, again, there is no proof.

One can speculate all day long, and come up with a variety of scenarios, but the fact remains that Lance was either clean, or smart enough to outsmart the people who's job it was to bust him.

He's a badass either way.

 

[Rupert]

(BTW, I met Tom Simpson when I was 4, saw my first TdF stage a year later, have helped organise regional championships and hosted stagiaires when I lived in France and reported for the original cycling news way back when - does this entitle me to an opinion on pro cycling? )

But can you see Russia from your house?

 

[franciep10]

now Eddy Merckx is the greatest rider of all time but frankly despite the fact that lance doped he is the best Tour de france rider of all time *** he won the most so we can't put merckx LBL or any other of his wins into consideration Lance is maybe top 5, definitely top 10 ever regardless of doping. back to the point though I think the strongest rider on astana in the tour will be supported contador pretty much summed it up, I think we are hoping for Lemond vs Hinault 1986.

 

[Anonymous]

Sorry, where was I wrong about Armstrong's fitness? The race is only just halfway through with several decisive stages to come. I said he looked tired and had lost the air of invincibility he once had.

which of course he has having been out for four years and just broken a collarbone... actually i think his performances in this giro have been nothing short of spectacular.. to ride as well as he has gone after being retired (and just imagine what that means,.. not training full time, not watching the diet in the same way, and not competing) for that long, and only just coming back from injury... i think his performances have been nothing less than incredible personally... 13th in the time trial today.. id challenge any rider today to take four years out and come back and do that.. i can think of a few that where out a couple of years, landis for instance who havnt shown any kind of form..

not dissagreaing with you.. merely agreeing that he has lost the invincible edge, but hardly surprising..

(BTW, I met Tom Simpson when I was 4, saw my first TdF stage a year later, have helped organise regional championships and hosted stagiaires when I lived in France and reported for the original cycling news way back when - does this entitle me to an opinion on pro cycling? )

it entitles you to an opinion, but i would argue that if you had only watched cycling for ten years, or never seen cycling till yesterday, or if you where greg lemond you would also be entitled to an opinion.. i personally do not think anybodys experience makes there opinions any less or more valid.. we are all allowed them, regardless..

just some of us are correct in our opinions more often..