Official Lance Armstrong thread

[Azdak6]

+1

after watching the stage last night I wonder whether he could have bridged the gap to the Schelcks if he had of attacked earlier. Sure, he can't match their accelerations but as he showed on st16 he can ride across the gap as soon as they settle into a tempo.

the guy is pure class and is showing all the doubters that strenght + tactics is the way to ride the TdF.

I now think AC is lucky to have him on the team, LA / JB combo has helped him get/retain yellow.

Not to take away from Armstrong's performance, but if there was ever a TdF that a strong rider could pretty much win on his own, this one is it.

By placing all the "action" in the last week, it meant that Contador could hang back and really did not need a team to defend the jersey for an extended period of time. The lack of mountaintop finishes and the relatively small time differentials have meant that, he hasn't needed as much of a team to drag him through a number of tough mountain stages. He has just had to follow the Schlecks and then ride off for a few Km at the end.

That doesn't take anything away from his performance--he almost certainly could have done more if necessary and he is obviously the strongest rider. But my perception is that this has not been as "team dependent" a TdF as most.

 

[indurain666]

+1

after watching the stage last night I wonder whether he could have bridged the gap to the Schelcks if he had of attacked earlier. Sure, he can't match their accelerations but as he showed on st16 he can ride across the gap as soon as they settle into a tempo.

the guy is pure class and is showing all the doubters that strenght + tactics is the way to ride the TdF.

I now think AC is lucky to have him on the team, LA / JB combo has helped him get/retain yellow.

hahahahahahahha...good joke ...you guys are dreaming

 

[mherm79]

That doesn't take anything away from his performance--he almost certainly could have done more if necessary and he is obviously the strongest rider. But my perception is that this has not been as "team dependent" a TdF as most.

not sure about the that. the TTT pretty much eliminated most of the GC contendors as they where just too far behind.

Astana has then controlled the race with AC having to do very little work, except of course when it matters. plus a strong team also includes team management and strategies.

 

[Azdak6]

not sure about the that. the TTT pretty much eliminated most of the GC contendors as they where just too far behind.

Astana has then controlled the race with AC having to do very little work, except of course when it matters. plus a strong team also includes team management and strategies.

Very true. I was thinking more along the lines of 1999, 2000 and other years where a team took on the MJ relatively early in the race and had to defend it over a much tougher parcours than we have seen this year.

 

[Golddigger]

It Ain't the Tour d'Lance

To all you LA groupies out there: get a grip. What we saw on the Petit St Bernard was not LA power up to the group, but AS shutting down the attack and AK radioing back to LA that info. It was a rehearsal for the Romme, which was the dress rehearsal for Saturday when AS wins the stage.

Think about it if AS climbs better than FS, and FS did all the leading yesterday, then AS is the real bum kicker. It will be a real show down between AS and AC, LA will be so far behind.

And all you journos, please get a grip. On reporting on Jens's post-crash condition you get you info from LAs twitter!? I would think that a person who might really know would be his Director Rijs, why not get a comment from him?

As boring as this race has been, the media's insatiable Lance-ithon just adds to the boredom. Why don't you journos go out and find a story rather than just blah-blah-blah LA all day. (Hint there was a guy in yellow for 8 days, did you ever even go over to his team's bus and talk to anyone there?)

It is the TOUR d'FRANCE, not d'lance--please

 

[scribe]

You gotta admit, he is impressive for a 38yo!

 

[Nobody you know]

And yet here is ANOTHER thread devoted to the Farce d' Lance!

 

[Futuroscope]

yup, im not gonna comment on the astana internal drama any more.

contador leads the TDF and yet people are blasting him (most of those who are doing that simply have no knowledge of cycling).

contador wins the TDF unless he crashes or bonk on mount ventoux.

schleck is the second strongest in the mountains and will get second place in the tour.

the fight for third place is open...armstrong, klöden, wiggins, nibali, frank schleck..any of those guys can take third place.

 

[Anonymous]

Golddigger,

Seems it is YOU that has the fascination.

Why the new thread? Attention prostitute like Lance perhaps?

 

[Golddigger]

only if you want it to be, it is a sh*t journo thread, not a kiss the ground his tires rolled over. My fascination is the race, not idiocy of the all too predictable journos who know too little about the sport.

 

[Greisty]

You don't know what you are talking about, not a surprise.

Do you understand the reason why the UCI only accepts the results of objective, independently administered antidoping tests? The drivel you write is the reason.

It is not sufficient for someone to say, "Rider X is a doper" because then anyone could denounce anyone else, and if it served the purposes of the antidoping authority, that person would be convicted as a doper. Thus, we have objective criteria that do not included heresay to determine whether someone has doped.

According to these criteria, Hamilton is a doper. Landis -- and I don't want to believe this one, but I do, because he meets the objective criterion for being a doper -- is a doper.

By these objective criteria, Lance Armstrong is not a doper. He might be flash, and it might irritate you that people who don't know much about cycling like him, but he is not a doper according to the criteria for doping that the authority which determines who is a doper has promulgated.

This really isn't that difficult. Despite Yogi Bera's observation, ("If I hadn't believed it, I wouldn't have seen it"), really believing or just knowing Lance Armstrong doped in your heart of hearts doesn't make it any more true. I mean, I know you're not a total idiot, but an reasonable, objective person would probably disagree with me.

 

[unsheath]

^^ Bejesus. Grab yourself some knowledge about cycling history and make your own mind about whether he doped or not, but please don't rehash garbage from the livestrong site or articles you've read in the mass media. And especially don't quote the 'never been tested positive line'. Open your eyes and ears. The information is there if you seek it.

 

[BroDeal]

By these objective criteria, Lance Armstrong is not a doper. He might be flash, and it might irritate you that people who don't know much about cycling like him, but he is not a doper according to the criteria for doping that the authority which determines who is a doper has promulgated.

We don't really care about you declaring the criteria that fits your agenda. We care about whether he took dope. The answer to that is an undeniable yes. Whether he was ever sanctioned for it is irrelevant to whether he used PEDs. If you want argue about it then go to The Clinic forum.

 

[aidanogle]

Team Radio Shack thats the rumour on the new team.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Tell Phil Liggett that...

 

[iceaxe]

Is it me or is LA being a bit obnoxious in the way he publicly second guesses contador? He seems to assume the worst and shoots off his mouth before he knows the full story. I hope it is just him trying to create controversy to make things more interesting for viewers. Lance needs to stop being a sour puss and accept that Contador is kicking his ****.

 

[whiteboytrash]

Is it me or is LA being a bit obnoxious in the way he publicly second guesses contador? He seems to assume the worst and shoots off his mouth before he knows the full story. I hope it is just him trying to create controversy to make things more interesting for viewers. Lance needs to stop being a sour puss and accept that Contador is kicking his ****.

Must be Contador's "no gifts" style of riding p=ssing him off. You can tell he hates it that Contador is so good, has so much style and doesn't shoot his mouth off. You have to admit Contador has been cool the whole way through this Tour despite team HogStrong attempting to stick the knife in at every turn. Well done Alberto.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Or just about any of the journalists or media outlets.

It really does stink that Rinaldo Nocentini rode a great race, is still riding well, and spent all that time in yellow, and we hardly heard a peep from him, or read anything about him in the press. During that entire week he was in the lead, 95% of the discussions were about Lance and Contador and Astana. Over and over, ad nauseum.

 

[Anonymous]

contador leads the TDF and yet people are blasting him (most of those who are doing that simply have no knowledge of cycling)..

I have plenty of knowledge of cycling, and i blast contador what does that make me,..,.?

 

[BroDeal]

I have plenty of knowledge of cycling, and i blast contador what does that make me,..,.?

A hater.

 

[Anonymous]

A hater.

really....

Do i get a badge?

(I just think hes an idiot, tactically inept, and would bleed someone elses bloody if you cut him..)

 

[iceaxe]

I'm glad there is finally a thread devoted to Lance. He is the only thing that makes the tour interesting. I have no idea who the schleks are and I dont care. I remember them being beaten by Landis a few years ago. A couple of nonentities. Lance may be a jerk but he has intensity like nobody else. He has charisma. He hates to lose. I hope he wakes up and attacks Contador.

 

[Jonathan]

Is it me or is LA being a bit obnoxious in the way he publicly second guesses contador? He seems to assume the worst and shoots off his mouth before he knows the full story. I hope it is just him trying to create controversy to make things more interesting for viewers. Lance needs to stop being a sour puss and accept that Contador is kicking his ****.

Hasn't Armstrong always been like that? He's trying to use media statements to bring his opponents out of balance. Armstrong is good at that, because he is able to keep a middle way between staying politcally correct and saying something very annoying. Most of his statements are part of his strategy, usually in a quite transparent way. I like the little details in his one-liners, like adding 'oh well' after saying he doesn't understand Contador. It's very patronizing (a common attitude for Armstrong) and very to the point. Quite clever.

What he is actually saying doesn't often make sense; on the one hand he is going to help Contador but at the same time he wants to reach 2nd place? That is a contradiction; a helper must sacrifice his own chances.

 

[Anonymous]

Do you understand the reason why the UCI only accepts the results of objective, independently administered antidoping tests? The drivel you write is the reason.

It is not sufficient for someone to say, "Rider X is a doper" because then anyone could denounce anyone else, and if it served the purposes of the antidoping authority, that person would be convicted as a doper. Thus, we have objective criteria that do not included heresay to determine whether someone has doped.

According to these criteria, Hamilton is a doper. Landis -- and I don't want to believe this one, but I do, because he meets the objective criterion for being a doper -- is a doper.

By these objective criteria, Lance Armstrong is not a doper. He might be flash, and it might irritate you that people who don't know much about cycling like him, but he is not a doper according to the criteria for doping that the authority which determines who is a doper has promulgated.

This really isn't that difficult. Despite Yogi Bera's observation, ("If I hadn't believed it, I wouldn't have seen it"), really believing or just knowing Lance Armstrong doped in your heart of hearts doesn't make it any more true. I mean, I know you're not a total idiot, but an reasonable, objective person would probably disagree with me.

Funny, the point you miss in all of your furor is that my name isn't "UCI" and I don't have the same burden of proof because I'm not a governing body. And by the same standard I use for Armstrong, I can say definitively say that you are in fact an idiot.

 

[Jonathan]

It is not sufficient for someone to say, "Rider X is a doper" because then anyone could denounce anyone else...

Not sufficient for what purpose?