krebs303 said:It's all pretty mild since jackhammer111 and BYU123 left. ah the good ol' days
I just noticed that you have 3 numbers in your nickname like they do. You're not gonna go mental on us as well, are you?
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
krebs303 said:It's all pretty mild since jackhammer111 and BYU123 left. ah the good ol' days
TheArbiter said:It's all a lie then....all the pro cyclists, cycling journalists and commentators are lying. It was all a hoax. Armstrong just magically won 7 times in a row after taking some dope. That everybody else was doped too, but couldn't win, has nothing to do with anything...
You stay in that hateful little bubble if it makes you feel better. As a cycling fan myself I can't help but appreciate great riders. That's just me though.
TheArbiter said:He's done more for cycling than you could do in a thousand years, pal.
TheArbiter said:The other person to win two grand tours in the same year, this decade, is Contador, but that was only because he wasn't in the ToF that year. I don't know why you have to deny the way Armstrong transformed tour preperation. It's a fact.
Digger said:Why, does it hurt your feelings to hear the truth? no mix up with cabs...it was team cars. El Pais article, and I don't see Lance disputing the key points of it.
Just a 'tabloid' though sure?!!!
Eva Maria said:Do you have a link for this claim? Armstrong has a history of not paying his teammates. Andreau, Salvodeli, and Vasseur were all stiffed on USPS.
B.Rasmussen said:I just noticed that you have 3 numbers in your nickname like they do. You're not gonna go mental on us as well, are you?
VeloFidelis said:I remember that. Say what was the legal resolution with all that?
TheArbiter said:You stay in that hateful little bubble if it makes you feel better. As a cycling fan myself I can't help but appreciate great riders. That's just me though.
VeloFidelis said:So, I take that you find this article in a Spanish publication to be 100% credible?
krebs303 said:
TRDean said:What exactly has he done for cycling? Is the sport better today than it was before he came along? I would actually argue differently. More boring today than ever...give me van Impe, Lucho Herrera, LeMond, Moser, Bungo, heck..there are many great riders who I would rather watch. Answer the question...what the heck has he done for cycling? I mean really!!
VeloFidelis said:I am no Lance fan, but even I have to agree that the guy has affected the popularity of professional cycling on a global level. Whether it's the cancer connection or the accomplishments, is immaterial. They guy has made significant history. Methods and character don't matter to the vast majority of fans. If they did the NFL wouldn't exist.
Back in the 70's Sports Illustrated used to publish a World Wide Top 10 Athlete's survey, and i used to have to explain to my friends who Eddy Merckx and Pele' were. I just Googled: Greatest Athletes of all Time - Top Ten List. Guess who is number 9?
Whethter you like the guy or hate him, you'd have to have your head in the sand to say he has not affected the sport of cycling.
Digger said:Lol, what aspects of it would you like to dispute?
VeloFidelis said:Just one. How accurate do you think it is?
I am constantly amazed that when I read something in the paper and I am even slightly knowledgeable about the situation regardless of the topic, they usually get it about 50% right. So why should I apply any less standard to a story where I don't have personal knowledge or background?
I am not implying a nationalist bias here, although it is a consideration, but just how much credibility do you give the press?
Please don't tell me you take everything as face value. I know better.
VeloFidelis said:I am no Lance fan, but even I have to agree that the guy has affected the popularity of professional cycling on a global level. Whether it's the cancer connection or the accomplishments, is immaterial. They guy has made significant history. Methods and character don't matter to the vast majority of fans. If they did the NFL wouldn't exist.
Back in the 70's Sports Illustrated used to publish a World Wide Top 10 Athlete's survey, and i used to have to explain to my friends who Eddy Merckx and Pele' were. I just Googled: Greatest Athletes of all Time - Top Ten List. Guess who is number 9?
Whethter you like the guy or hate him, you'd have to have your head in the sand to say he has not affected the sport of cycling.
Zen Master said:And when you said World you mean USA
Sorry mate but in Europe every child back in the 70's knew very well who were Eddy Merckx and Pele. And for example in France last year on a question: Do you like that Lance coming out of retirement ?! 90% said NO !?
VeloFidelis said:Just one. How accurate do you think it is?
I am constantly amazed that when I read something in the paper and I am even slightly knowledgeable about the situation regardless of the topic, they usually get it about 50% right. So why should I apply any less standard to a story where I don't have personal knowledge or background?
I am not implying a nationalist bias here, although it is a consideration, but just how much credibility do you give the press?
Please don't tell me you take everything as face value. I know better.
Zen Master said:And when you said World you mean USA
Sorry mate but in Europe every child back in the 70's knew very well who were Eddy Merckx and Pele. And for example in France last year on a question: Do you like that Lance coming out of retirement ?! 90% said NO !?
TheArbiter said:Nonsense. The Armstrong story boosted cycling everywhere.
One minute the criticism is that he made the tour do france too popular and important, the next minute he supposed to have made no difference to anything. It's very confused.
However, though he increased interest in cycling around the globe, the attitudes towards him in various places depend on general cultural attitudes. In Europe its no conincidence that success is often sneered at, whereas in the US they admire greatness.
Other factors play their part too. In Spain and Italy he was disliked, on one level, for downgrading their own grand tours, and in France disliked to winning it all the time, so their are always these little reasons. But for the most part its pantomime villain stuff. As we saw on the streets of France this year, and in Italy before that, the same people who probably slag him off all the time were lining the streets to cheer him on and grab a photo. People are very schizophrenic.
I know this isn't the clinic but that goes for doping matters too - those who shout the loudest about it are usually the same people that would bite their own arm off to get hold of some cera if they were competiting. They think everybody must think like they do, which is why they are so suspicious of the pros.
TheArbiter said:Nonsense. The Armstrong story boosted cycling everywhere.
One minute the criticism is that he made the tour do france too popular and important, the next minute he supposed to have made no difference to anything. It's very confused.
However, though he increased interest in cycling around the globe, the attitudes towards him in various places depend on general cultural attitudes. In Europe its no conincidence that success is often sneered at, whereas in the US they admire greatness.
Other factors play their part too. In Spain and Italy he was disliked, on one level, for downgrading their own grand tours, and in France disliked to winning it all the time, so their are always these little reasons. But for the most part its pantomime villain stuff. As we saw on the streets of France this year, and in Italy before that, the same people who probably slag him off all the time were lining the streets to cheer him on and grab a photo. People are very schizophrenic.
I know this isn't the clinic but that goes for doping matters too - those who shout the loudest about it are usually the same people that would bite their own arm off to get hold of some cera if they were competiting. They think everybody must think like they do, which is why they are so suspicious of the pros.
TheArbiter said:Nonsense. The Armstrong story boosted cycling everywhere.
One minute the criticism is that he made the tour do france too popular and important, the next minute he supposed to have made no difference to anything. It's very confused.
However, though he increased interest in cycling around the globe, the attitudes towards him in various places depend on general cultural attitudes. In Europe its no conincidence that success is often sneered at, whereas in the US they admire greatness.
Other factors play their part too. In Spain and Italy he was disliked, on one level, for downgrading their own grand tours, and in France disliked to winning it all the time, so their are always these little reasons. But for the most part its pantomime villain stuff. As we saw on the streets of France this year, and in Italy before that, the same people who probably slag him off all the time were lining the streets to cheer him on and grab a photo. People are very schizophrenic.
I know this isn't the clinic but that goes for doping matters too - those who shout the loudest about it are usually the same people that would bite their own arm off to get hold of some cera if they were competiting. They think everybody must think like they do, which is why they are so suspicious of the pros.
Zen Master said:And when you said World you mean USA
Sorry mate but in Europe every child back in the 70's knew very well who were Eddy Merckx and Pele. And for example in France last year on a question: Do you like that Lance coming out of retirement ?! 90% said NO !?
Digger said:Okay the one incident I am referring to from the article is the car story, whereby AC was left stranded. This has been reported in a number of sources and has not been denied by Lance.