Jan Ullrich

[Franklin]

Really? LeMond's palmares are filled with things like 2nd at Milan San Remo, 3rd at LBL, 4th at Paris-Roubaix... One of the races he really wanted to win was P-R.

Sorry, this one does not completely fly. Certainly we have Milan San Remo and a good placement in P-N, but for example LBL is pretty much in late april where Jan also did some good things in that timeslot (rund um kon for example or some decent showings in the Giro).

We could argue that it was just a few years where Greg was good early on, but that has the problem of for and after the hunting incident, so it's impossible to say much about that.

What we do know that Greg also was a classics rider of some accomplishment, but he certainly had the shortest season of all his peers. If we compare him with guys like Hinault and Fignon he has a very lean allround palmares indeed.

The P-R statement are primarily from his columns, but really Greg finished P-R 4 times and only once managed a top 10. You imply he was really aiming to win it, while the evidence seems to suggest he didn't compete most of his career.

really, if you are making a case that Greg wasn't just focussed on GT's I would like you to put Lance's schedule against Greg's. You will find Lance also had decent classics (yes even in his TdF years) and disappeared after the WC. Simply put... reading much in Jan's build-up seems pretty pointless. We know he was big time doper, that's enough really.

 

[roundabout]

Correct me if I am wrong

1998 null komma nix until June

1999 ditto

2000 ditto

2001 first good results in the Giro

2002 okay in the echelons in Quatar

2003 Köln against a bunch of nobodies, best Ardennes results of 29th and 31st

2004 nix until June

2005 Sarthe, Aragon, didn't suck completely

2006 nix until the Giro TT, started the season in Romandie, I think

So yeah, rather underwhelming. But of course as long as it's Ullrich, hitting form in May-June is not a sign of being lazy

 

[Franklin]

So yeah, rather underwhelming. But of course as long as it's Ullrich, hitting form in May-June is not a sign of being lazy

If you think a lazy person can win a GT we are pretty much finished here as we simply will never agree on that count

Or do you actually argue that Greg was lazy in 1989/1990?

Besides, the argument was made that Jan's form profile is evidence for doping. This is really tricky unless we are going to argue that those who have a long form curve are all of a sudden clean. It's one of those things where we really don't know if it's a sign or not and where there is empirical evidence on both sides of the divide (peaking dopers and long form dopers). We know he was a doper, his form curve is pretty much nice for academia and discussions

 

[roundabout]

So he is not fat and not lazy, but usually reaches form only in June. Quite a conundrum.

And I am not arguing about peaks vs long form curves. I am thinking more that he could have had a better career without needing to chase form for the first half of the season.

 

[Franklin]

So he is not fat and not lazy, but usually reaches form only in June. Quite a conundrum.

I don't really see the issue here... Being invisible in the spring is not proof of being lazy. All we have is opinion and here we disagree. Not a big deal imho?

It's the clinic and we all agree he was a big time doper

And I am not arguing about peaks vs long form curves. I am thinking more that he could have had a better career without needing to chase form for the first half of the season.

Perhaps... or it could have made him squander his forces. We don't know. It's opinion really.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

To the LeMond also peaked only for the Tour myth part:
http://www.procyclingstats.com/rider.php?=&id=113201&season=1984
http://www.procyclingstats.com/rider.php?=&id=113201&season=1985
http://www.procyclingstats.com/rider.php?=&id=113201&season=1986

and:
http://www.dewielersite.net/db2/wielersite/coureurfiche.php?coureurid=4104

And those statistics are far from complete.
Pre- and after the hunting accident are of course seen in the results.

Shall we compare with der Jan?

 

[ultimobici]

Sorry, this one does not completely fly. Certainly we have Milan San Remo and a good placement in P-N, but for example LBL is pretty much in late april where Jan also did some good things in that timeslot (rund um kon for example or some decent showings in the Giro).

We could argue that it was just a few years where Greg was good early on, but that has the problem of for and after the hunting incident, so it's impossible to say much about that.

What we do know that Greg also was a classics rider of some accomplishment, but he certainly had the shortest season of all his peers. If we compare him with guys like Hinault and Fignon he has a very lean allround palmares indeed.

The P-R statement are primarily from his columns, but really Greg finished P-R 4 times and only once managed a top 10. You imply he was really aiming to win it, while the evidence seems to suggest he didn't compete most of his career.

really, if you are making a case that Greg wasn't just focussed on GT's I would like you to put Lance's schedule against Greg's. You will find Lance also had decent classics (yes even in his TdF years) and disappeared after the WC. Simply put... reading much in Jan's build-up seems pretty pointless. We know he was big time doper, that's enough really.

If you're going to criticise Lemond's P-R record, at least have the decency to be accurate. 4th in 1985, 9th in 1992. His record in the Superprestige Pernot isn't too shapbby either, winner in 83, with 2nd & 3rd in 86 & 85 respectively. Something that didn't rely heavily on the Tour to win.

Comparing Lemond's Classics/GT approach to Armstrong's is equally futile. Prior to the shooting Lemond aimed for both Classics and the Giro & Tour, whereas Armstrong was a Classics & stage hunter only prior to his cancer. It was only with the aid of dope that he morphed into a wannabe Lemond.

 

[Franklin]

And once again I stand accused for even suggesting Greg Lemond isn't the best thing since sliced bread. Which is even more amusing considering I'm not criticising Greg at all.

If you're going to criticise Lemond's P-R record, at least have the decency to be accurate. 4th in 1985, 9th in 1992. His record in the Superprestige Pernot isn't too shapbby either, winner in 83, with 2nd & 3rd in 86 & 85 respectively. Something that didn't rely heavily on the Tour to win.

Criticisizing is something else than pointing out the facts. And yeah I missed the 9th spot which is sloppy. Greg might have wanted to win P-R, his palmares shows it was

The win in 1983 is actually more of an argument for his classics prowess than the 85/86 years as a cursory glance shows that indeed the GT's are a big deal of placing high. It took Sean Kelly to break that trend decisively

Comparing Lemond's Classics/GT approach to Armstrong's is equally futile. Prior to the shooting Lemond aimed for both Classics and the Giro & Tour, whereas Armstrong was a Classics & stage hunter only prior to his cancer. It was only with the aid of dope that he morphed into a wannabe Lemond.

Yes, yes, Lance is evil, I agree. Yes, I agree their careers are vastly different. But the 1985/1986 years of Greg are not extremely different than what Lanced cheated together in 1999-2002 where Lance indeed had a decent showing in more than just the TdF.

Yes, all dope fueled, but that's exactly the point. Season-buildup are not a dead ringer for doping. We have Jalabert who was in it for the season, Greg who definitely was more of a peak kind of guy.

And I know, the peaking of Greg will be denied. The general consensus during those years was that indeed Greg was invisible for most of the year (disappearing to the States).

 

[Franklin]

To the LeMond also peaked only for the Tour myth part:
http://www.procyclingstats.com/rider.php?=&id=113201&season=1984
http://www.procyclingstats.com/rider.php?=&id=113201&season=1985
http://www.procyclingstats.com/rider.php?=&id=113201&season=1986

and:
http://www.dewielersite.net/db2/wielersite/coureurfiche.php?coureurid=4104

And those statistics are far from complete.
Pre- and after the hunting accident are of course seen in the results.

Shall we compare with der Jan?

Oh please, shall we compare it with his peers? You simply can not deny that Greg had the shortest season of all his peers.

And about Jan? He definitely had less results in the classics and he definitely has a worse palmares (should I repeat a few million times that Greg is the god of cycling?), but Jan surfaced just as Greg around April. Definitely dope fueled (let me repeat that a few 100 times to appease you).

And yes, I am absolutely fugging tired of having to hear about the excellence of Greg wheelsucker Lemond. Perhaps because I watched all those years, but Greg was an annoying *** who almost never attacked and only reacted. Whiny as hell.

He can't hold a candle to the brilliance of Hinault and was a snore compared to the fire of Fignon. He has a good palmares but even there he isn't in the top 3.

Rawr, rant over.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Oh please, shall we compare it with his peers? You simply can not deny that Greg had the shortest season of all his peers.

If you really want all the race dates of LeMond you can pm me, in 1985 it was february till friggin october for instance. in 1986 even more.

Doing two GT's.

 

[Franklin]

If you really want all the race dates of LeMond you can pm me, in 1985 it was february till friggin october for instance. in 1986 even more.

Doing two GT's.

Race dates is different than peak form whcih is what we were discussing.

And boy do I poke an anthill by saying I don't care much for Greg Lemond the racer (I laud his stance on doping).

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Race dates is different than peak form whcih is what we were discussing.

And boy do I poke an anthill by saying I don't care much for Greg Lemond the racer (I laud his stance on doping).

What is peak form?

You didnt poke anything here with me, perhaps I misinterpreted you when you said:
''Oh please, shall we compare it with his peers? You simply can not deny that Greg had the shortest season of all his peers.''

That, my friend, is simply untrue. Even in 1988 he ''raced'' for 70 racedays or so.

It is a myth LeMond only raced at the Tour, especially pre - gunshot. I tend to think where this comes from, as you are Dutch too, but the informer was wrong.

Jan, on the other hand, was there for one month every year. Sometimes the odd TT in the Giro of course

 

[Race Radio]

Correct me if I am wrong

1998 null komma nix until June

1999 ditto

2000 ditto

2001 first good results in the Giro

2002 okay in the echelons in Quatar

2003 Köln against a bunch of nobodies, best Ardennes results of 29th and 31st

2004 nix until June

2005 Sarthe, Aragon, didn't suck completely

2006 nix until the Giro TT, started the season in Romandie, I think

So yeah, rather underwhelming. But of course as long as it's Ullrich, hitting form in May-June is not a sign of being lazy

You are are right

. Jan would be largely invisible for much of the year then suddenly, BANG, he was on form. It is absurd to compare him to LeMond who raced much of the year and, according to him, never gained more then 10 Pounds in the off season.

Jan was not lazy, he trained hard. He did have a problem with food though. I remember at a training camp in 05 or 06 he had his own table every day and was not allowed to go get his own food from the buffet like the other riders but was brought specific plates for him. The Team treated him like a child....which I always thought was wrong

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

The Team treated him like a child....which I always thought was wrong

You mean Pevenage I recon...

 

[Race Radio]

You mean Pevenage I recon...

He was one of many. The team, the media, they all treated Jan like a child

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

He was one of many. The team, the media, they all treated Jan like a child

In a way he was.

Not strange given the fact where he came from.

From footstamps to multi - miljonair.

Not an uncommon problem.

The goose with the golden eggs.

 

[stainlessguy1]

And once again I stand accused for even suggesting Greg Lemond isn't the best thing since sliced bread. Which is even more amusing considering I'm not criticising Greg at all.



Criticisizing is something else than pointing out the facts. And yeah I missed the 9th spot which is sloppy. Greg might have wanted to win P-R, his palmares shows it was

The win in 1983 is actually more of an argument for his classics prowess than the 85/86 years as a cursory glance shows that indeed the GT's are a big deal of placing high. It took Sean Kelly to break that trend decisively



Yes, yes, Lance is evil, I agree. Yes, I agree their careers are vastly different. But the 1985/1986 years of Greg are not extremely different than what Lanced cheated together in 1999-2002 where Lance indeed had a decent showing in more than just the TdF.

Yes, all dope fueled, but that's exactly the point. Season-buildup are not a dead ringer for doping. We have Jalabert who was in it for the season, Greg who definitely was more of a peak kind of guy.

And I know, the peaking of Greg will be denied. The general consensus during those years was that indeed Greg was invisible for most of the year (disappearing to the States).

Good Points , but the last point that Greg disappeared to the states for appearances. It was a must do during that time. ( which can account for a selective race schedule. )
Go back and look at the sponsor situation and all the factors before cycling became a big hit in North America .
Please remember , the pro cycling was growing during that time , and it wasn't until later that cycling became a household word amongst the public.
So in reality all this comparison talk between athletes of different time periods is a bit of a waste of time when trying to figure out who was better, or who did what and when.

Now lets look at the personal preferences of riders and their ability to do well in all kinds of weather. That plays a roll , concentrating on a GT plays a big role , why get killed in PR in a giant sink hole between cobbles when you are concentrating on the Giro . Most want to get to the giro fit and not start it broken or injured.
The trend of pulling out of races is now more evident than ever before , lots of the top riders are doing it so they get to the major tours in tact.

Don't be so hard on Jan for not living up to the fan image of riding every single race.

Lots of top contenders riders are now riding different small tours and classic races not just to build fitness but also to build confidence .
They will all meet again at the GT's then it gets interesting.

I think Jan is having more fun riding cyclo sportive events than racing now, plus he gets to spend time with his family and give back to the sport in other ways .
That alone is helping get people out on bikes and performance cruising.
Its a win win situation for the bike industry.

 

[Fatclimber]

In his younger days Ullrich used to train with heavy steel frames. He also attached two drinking bottles filled with led to his training bike.
Calling Ullrich lazy is a one sided aproach. He might have been at times, but at other times he trained as hard as anybody.

I know people who also have utilized similar techniques (lead vests, etc..). It always seemed so silly to me. If the pedaling is not hard enough, change gears and go harder. The only useful purpose I can see is to lengthen out a hill a little more if that is what is needed. But what do you do with you water bottles if all your cages are filled with lead?

 

[Franklin]

Good Points , but the last point that Greg disappeared to the states for appearances. It was a must do during that time. ( which can account for a selective race schedule. )

I see nothing suspicious in Greg going back to the States and I have no suspicion at all in his far more selective schedule/palmares.

So in reality all this comparison talk between athletes of different time periods is a bit of a waste of time when trying to figure out who was better, or who did what and when.

100% agreed and exactly what I'm trying to say. People here are reading things in Jan's palmares which is really impossible. Or we should all of a sudden think that Froome is clear as spring water considering he peaks in the spring

The trend of pulling out of races is now more evident than ever before , lots of the top riders are doing it so they get to the major tours in tact.

greg started it and it was very smart!

Don't be so hard on Jan for not living up to the fan image of riding every single race.

I think I'm the least hard on him considering the pitchforks here. Even a clean peloton would be much more selective than in the good ole days.

I think Jan is having more fun riding cyclo sportive events than racing now, plus he gets to spend time with his family and give back to the sport in other ways .
That alone is helping get people out on bikes and performance cruising.
Its a win win situation for the bike industry.

Jan is really another blemish on cycling. But the guy himself is really a nice guy as all we met him will attest to.

 

[Franklin]

Jan was not lazy, he trained hard. He did have a problem with food though. I remember at a training camp in 05 or 06 he had his own table every day and was not allowed to go get his own food from the buffet like the other riders but was brought specific plates for him.

Beware: This is all very much part of the Lance mythlogy and part of Pevenage's control scheme's. It's very disconcerting that Lance's propaganda war against Jan is taken at face value. "Jan is more talented than anyone else" Which implied it was Jan's fault. A very, very insiduous mindfug.

I certainly didn't put him on a scale, but Jan is not a big guy by any standard. And at the TdF he was rather thin... anyone who shook his hand at the TdF will agree on that one.

On a side note, every TdF winner is fat if we look at Froggins. A low weight is a big plus, but a guy like Lance never needed extreme measures, he did it on his (artifically enhanced) engine. Ultra thin TdF winners are imho still a minority (though the number is growing). The multiple winners, clean or dirty, generally are strong guys, not stick figures.

 

[Race Radio]

I think I'm the least hard on him considering the pitchforks here. Even a clean peloton would be much more selective than in the good ole days.

Jan is really another blemish on cycling. But the guy himself is really a nice guy as all we met him will attest to.

Jan is indeed a nice guy. I certainly do not have a pitchfork out to go get him......but he never would have won a Tour on a level playing field. Would have won some classics but no way would he have won the Tour.

 

[Franklin]

Jan is indeed a nice guy. I certainly do not have a pitchfork out to go get him......but he never would have won a Tour on a level playing field. Would have won some classics but no way would he have won the Tour.

Race, I really respect you and your knowledge, but you must realize this can be nothing else than opinion. We will never know.

 

[MarkvW]

What would pro cycling be like if it was completely unlike what it actually is?

 

[Neworld]

Jan, on the other hand, was there for one month every year. Sometimes the odd TT in the Giro of course

I will never say that Jan raced as much as GL.

But your commentary that he raced one month a year is wrong. Jan certainly raced more than Lancey, and attended the Worlds and Olympics in multiple years.

Do some research.

 

[Race Radio]

I will never say that Jan raced as much as GL.

But your commentary that he raced one month a year is wrong. Jan certainly raced more than Lancey, and attended the Worlds and Olympics in multiple years.

Do some research.

And the Vuelta too.....Jan did not like the cold or the rain

It is too bad that Jan's tactical acumen was never developed. The tactics of the day had the Tour decided by a few Mountain top finish. "Tactics" were replaced by Watt/kg

Jan showed flashes of brilliance in a few German races and the 2000 Olympic road race, it would have been interesting to see how he would have done in the classics