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

[Mellow Velo]

Don't know about 1999, but what about 2009?

Decent hilly classics rider magically metamorphosed into a GT winner. Takes a break from the sport under a bit of a cloud. Comes back late in his career to top flight racing, announces he will be riding for free and in support of his team leader.

Sound familiar? Danilo di Luca.

 

[Christian]

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.

I would say the 3rd Armstrong goes until his first retirement, and then add a number 4) Comeback-Armstrong.

I was actually thinking about starting a poll which Armstrong people loved the most/despised the least, but it's always a bit of a tricky situation starting threads/polls about Armstrong since there are so many.

My personal vote:

1) - did not follow cycling yet
2) - same
3) - disliked him, big Ullrich and Pantani supporter, was glad when he retired
4) - actually liked and respected him a lot more, thought he put in a great performance in '09, was almost sad to see him fail so miserably in '10

Tell me if you think this is worth of its own poll

 

[Bumeington]

Peter Velits. Good rider suddenly performs very well at the Vuelta. Good in both the mountains and the TT. Velits for the tour 2011?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Peter Velits. Good rider suddenly performs very well at the Vuelta. Good in both the mountains and the TT. Velits for the tour 2011?

Only as long as he's prepared to burn himself in the leadout train for Cav whilst wearing the maillot jaune.

 

[BotanyBay]

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?

A doped Armstrong or Armstrong as he would have been in 1999 "Sans-Dope"?

Saul Raisin comes to mind if the latter.

 

[Granville57]

A doped Armstrong or Armstrong as he would have been in 1999 "Sans-Dope"?

Saul Raisin comes to mind if the latter.

Sans dope. Just what he exhibited as a rider.
But obviously Saul won't be racing in the pro ranks anymore (unless I missed something?). Too bad, his would've been a great story to follow and it would've been really fun to watch him race.

 

[BotanyBay]

Sans dope. Just what he exhibited as a rider.
But obviously Saul won't be racing in the pro ranks anymore (unless I missed something?). Too bad, his would've been a great story to follow and it would've been really fun to watch him race.

OK, any mid-level D1 pro who can win a stage and finish the event. Any of 100 guys. Take your pick. Lance was a talent, but he was not the uber-talent.

 

[skippy]

Livestrong fund raising

HEY GUYS there is more info on Lance on http://www.fatcyclist.com/2011/01/10/cancer-politics-and-religion/#comment-512561

Checkout the facts, do your sums with your fingers and toes if need be and you will see some things that you have been choosing to ignore !

I know reality is beyond most of you , however i have noticed there are a few who have been JUMPED on like myself.

My email is open to those who do not go to the blog , but if you want to "big note yourself" to your "buddies" feel free to get out your "stomping boots" !

"Sticks & stones" !

 

[Semper Fidelis]

tom D's caffe sumantra

http://wp.tomdanielson.com/

Tom (looking for that porta-jon) Danielson.

 

[washedup]

Hmmm, which is why my OP included the following:

Don't let your **** get so sore. What do you expect, a humor free thread?

And yes, sans-dope LA is akin to pack fill. There was never a point of honesty in the guy's career.

 

[mad black]

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?

The interview was in the weeks leading up to the '99 Tour. I believe that Miguel bumped into Lance training somewhere in the Pyrenees during spring. Lance was doing the exact same preparation as Miguel used to when he won his 5 Tours.

I personally believe it's really about the right preparation if you're serious about winning the Tour these days. I mean you could dope as much as you want if you're a Cancellara or Hushovd or about 98% of all other professional cyclists (not saying any of them does!) they'd still stand zero chance of winning the Tour. Thus realizing that you have the potential of achieving a win in the Tour AND pursueing that goal like Lance did is what really makes the difference. And yes, he may have been aided by PED's but so would have been most (if not all) of his contemporaries in '99.