Coming into 2011, what rider most resembles Armstrong of 1999?

[Granville57]

Coming into 2011, which rider most resembles Armstrong of 1999?

I put this in The Clinic for obvious reasons—because it would likely end up here. But I’m not asking from a doping standpoint.

Heading into the 2011 season, who in the peloton most resembles Armstrong, the rider, as he was at the beginning of the 1999 season?

I’m curious to get a consensus based on overall rider ability and previous race performance. Of course this presents the scenario of, “Wait a minute! If that guy (whoever might be suggested) won the 2011 TdF, it would set off all kinds of alarm bells!” Which is why this is in The Clinic, because that’s inevitably part of the equation, to be sure. But more importantly, from a race performance aspect, which current rider shows the same ability/potential that Armstrong had displayed up to that point in his career?

Dismissing what Armstrong went on to achieve after 1999 (since we’re in the hypothetical) and only giving consideration to what he had shown glimmers of prior to that year will help to keep this on track.

This is not meant to disparage any current riders that share those same attributes, or to put them under any kind of suspicion (unless they go on to dominate the Tour for seven years straight ) but to put back into perspective the kind of rider Armstrong was before he became “Lance.”

Fair enough?

 

[flicker]

I put this in The Clinic for obvious reasons—because it would likely end up here. But I’m not asking from a doping standpoint.

Heading into the 2011 season, who in the peloton most resembles Armstrong, the rider, as he was at the beginning of the 1999 season?

I’m curious to get a consensus based on overall rider ability and previous race performance. Of course this presents the scenario of, “Wait a minute! If that guy (whoever might be suggested) won the 2011 TdF, it would set off all kinds of alarm bells!” Which is why this is in The Clinic, because that’s inevitably part of the equation, to be sure. But more importantly, from a race performance aspect, which current rider shows the same ability/potential that Armstrong had displayed up to that point in his career?

Dismissing what Armstrong went on to achieve after 1999 (since we’re in the hypothetical) and only giving consideration to what he had shown glimmers of prior to that year will help to keep this on track.

This is not meant to disparage any current riders that share those same attributes, or to put them under any kind of suspicion (unless they go on to dominate the Tour for seven years straight ) but to put back into perspective the kind of rider Armstrong was before he became “Lance.”

Fair enough?

No one can come close to Lance at this time. Contador looked as if he would be a better rider than Lance. His career is in shambles now.

In 10 or 20 years another big time champion will come around. I was very sorry to see Contador go down.

 

[sniper]

No one can come close to Lance at this time. Contador looked as if he would be a better rider than Lance. His career is in shambles now.

In 10 or 20 years another big time champion will come around. I was very sorry to see Contador go down.

it's a bad joke that he was allowed to come up in the first place

 

[ttrider]

If i had to give one name it would bee ll Sanchez, similar to Armstrong before cancer, slearly talented, classic specialist kind of guy etc, fairly sure he wont break through though

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Kim Kirchen. Reasonable climber, similar frame, winner of Ardennes Classic, sufferer of massive and frightening health scare. No way he wins the Tour though, whether he's confirmed as retiring or not.

Though to be fair to Armstrong, the pre-Cancer Armstrong had been more dynamic and successful as a Classics man, though he had shown less GC-wise pre-Cancer than Kirchen has to date, as Kim managed two top 10s at the Tour in 2007 and 2008.

 

[Christian]

Kim Kirchen. Reasonable climber, similar frame, winner of Ardennes Classic, sufferer of massive and frightening health scare. No way he wins the Tour though, whether he's confirmed as retiring or not.

Though to be fair to Armstrong, the pre-Cancer Armstrong had been more dynamic and successful as a Classics man, though he had shown less GC-wise pre-Cancer than Kirchen has to date, as Kim managed two top 10s at the Tour in 2007 and 2008.

That'll be more likely in 2012 then, he won't race in 2011.

Another good candidate: Jonny Bellis

 

[El Pistolero]

Joaquim Rodriguez.

 

[simo1733]

That'll be more likely in 2012 then, he won't race in 2011.

Another good candidate: Jonny Bellis

How is Jonny Bellis getting on?I know he road the nats dnf but haven't heard anything since.

 

[Anonymous]

Geraint Thomas, half decent time trialler, half decent one day rider, and can climb a little bit.

 

[sublimit]

Nicholas Roche of a couple of years ago, Solid attacking rider with a decent sprint ( probably better than Lance) and a reasonable but not great TT likewise.

Improving very quickly like Lance did if you look at last year.

 

[hrotha]

Markel Irizar. Had testicular cancer and rides for Bruyneel.

 

[Granville57]

Philippe Gilbert makes for an interesting comparison in terms of type of rider.

Gilbert is 28-years-old, Armstrong was 27 back then.

If we look at some comparative years and races prior...

In 1995 Amstrong won the Clásica de San Sebastián
In 2006 Gilbert won Het Volk as well as a stage at the Dauphine

In 1996 Armstrong won La Flèche Wallonne
In 2008 Gilbert won Paris-Tours and Het Volk (among others).
Both riders had won stages at the Tour (although Gilbert has stage wins at all three Grand Tours!).

In 1994 Armstrong was 2nd In Liege-Bastogne-Liege
In 2009 Gilbert was 4th in LBL, and 3rd in 2010

(As only a minor comparison, in 2007 Gilbert had a skin cancer lesion removed from his thigh which delayed the start of the season for him.)

And of course Armstrong won the World Championship in 1993.
Gilbert was a heavy favorite for Worlds in 2010.

It should go without saying that Philippe Gilbert has proven to be much more dominant overall, with over 20 outright victories and multiple podium positions and stage wins, but as contemporaries they probably would’ve faced each other quite often.

Hey Mods, maybe we could move this to the Professional road racing forum after all? (I could edit my OP accordingly if need be.)

 

[washedup]

Riccardo Ricco, since he is a blatant cheater who probably likes to look at himself in the mirror. Also, he dumped his baby-momma.

 

[Granville57]

Riccardo Ricco, since he is a blatant cheater who probably likes to look at himself in the mirror. Also, he dumped his baby-momma.

Hmmm, which is why my OP included the following:

Heading into the 2011 season, who in the peloton most resembles Armstrong, the rider, as he was at the beginning of the 1999 season?

 

[Merckx index]

If the comparison were with LA pre-cancer rather than post-cancer I would say Taylor Phinney. Great classics potential, GT not so much.

 

[rzombie1988]

I have to say Contador. I don't like the guy at all, but if he's in a tour, I have a really hard time betting against him.

 

[Granville57]

I have to say Contador. I don't like the guy at all, but if he's in a tour, I have a really hard time betting against him.

I appreciate the post but I think your missing the context that I put forth. I'm talking about which riders are most similar to Armstrong at the beginning of the 1999 season. No one expected him to win the Tour that year. He had shown nothing up to that point to indicate that he could.

Clearly, Contador is a favorite in any race he enters; and his Tour performances are similar to what Armstrong did at his peak. But again, I was looking for comparisons to the rider Armstrong was before his Tour domination.

 

[Granville57]

If the comparison were with LA pre-cancer rather than post-cancer I would say Taylor Phinney. Great classics potential, GT not so much.

Yeah, I suppose I should've just stated it that way: Pre vs Post.
I could've said more with fewer words.

Here's his 1996 win at Fleche Wallone
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-O2_KwWMUg&feature=player_embedded#!
Looks awfully strong on the Mur de Huy, especially considering that he was diagnosed only six months later.

 

[Merckx index]

Yeah, I suppose I should've just stated it that way: Pre vs Post.

It makes a big difference. There were three Armstrongs: 1) pre-cancer; 2) post-cancer but pre-99 Tour; and 3) 99 Tour and thereafter.

No one expected him to win the Tour that year. He had shown nothing up to that point to indicate that he could.

The first sentence might be true, but I don't agree with the second. He finished 4th in the '98 Vuelta, very close to the podium. He wasn't quite in his 7 TDF titles form then, but he was much closer to it than he had ever been pre-cancer. He was a much better climber at that point. Based on what he did in the Vuelta, it was not at all far-fetched to project him as top 10 in the Tour, which would have been far better than anything he accomplished there before. When someone projected top 10 wins the Tour, it's a little bit of a surprise, but not an are-you-kidding-me? moment.At least not in the fairly wide open 1999 Tour, missing Ullrich and Pantani, among others.

I think LA caught a lot of riders by surprise because they remembered his long record of mostly DNF in Tours past. But if they had been paying attention, they would have realized this was a possibility.

 

[Granville57]

It makes a big difference. There were three Armstrongs: 1) pre-cancer; 2) post-cancer but pre-99 Tour; and 3) 99 Tour and thereafter.

Absolutely. Well put.
And that is why I was looking at Pre-1999. It just seemed that the general concept was getting lost on some. But you're correct.

 

[Berzin]

With the mounting pressure to curb doping, there will be no one in the peloton allowed to take whatever they want in whatever amounts they want and to then have the rest of their team on a specific program to ensure Tour success.

The sheer ridiculousness of Armstrong's reign will probably never be allowed ever again.

The days of a Tour contender catching a rider on the last mountain of a stage for 6-plus minutes to then go on and win said stage are over.

This is irregardless of what is decided going forward with Contador's potential clenbutarol sanction and Armstrong's Federal case.

 

[Polish]

Coming into 2011 there are no riders that even remotely resemble Lance of 1999. Probably will be another 15 years or so before another comes along if history is any guide....

Fausto to Eddy about 25 years....
Eddy to Lance about 25 years....
Lance to ????.....in the year 2025

 

[magoo34]

Whoever mentioned Gilbert might be on to something. Eddy Merkcx issued a statement late last year that he felt Gilbert could possibly contend for a high GC position in a GT.

Lets all not forget that it was Merkcx who brokered the association between Armstrong and Ferrari.

 

[mad black]

... No one expected him to win the Tour that year. He had shown nothing up to that point to indicate that he could....

That's definitely not true. Miguel Indurain stated that Lance would win the Tour 1999 in an interview on Eurosport in the lead up that year. Admittedly everyone laughed at him including the commentators. However, Miguel should be a reference when it comes to evaluating somones training performance.

I guess the point is that Lance's performance wasn't something that was completely unexpected. And there could always be a surprise winner like Floyd was, be it with or without the aid of PED's.

 

[Granville57]

That's definitely not true. Miguel Indurain stated that Lance would win the Tour 1999 in an interview on Eurosport in the lead up that year. Admittedly everyone laughed at him including the commentators. However, Miguel should be a reference when it comes to evaluating somones training performance.

I guess the point is that Lance's performance wasn't something that was completely unexpected. And there could always be a surprise winner like Floyd was, be it with or without the aid of PED's.

Yes, or like Contador for that matter. He wasn't really on the short list leading up to 2007.

I agree that one should never take lightly the observations of someone like Indurain. I'm curious though, was that Indurain interview in the lead up to the start of the season or in the weeks leading up to the Tour itself?