Phil Anderson's expression and comments when talking about Armstrong

[beroepsrenner]

While I agree totally with your comments I find it laughable that Armstrong launches one bridging attack and all the dopeheads on here start firing up. His attack came a time when they guys in front had slowed with Andy knowing his efforts had been in vain. Why do i say that? because they were not making hardly any ground on Pelezotti during that whole time of attacking by Schlecklet. The attack was weak and was covered easily by Conti and the rest.

Yeas Lance looked strong going across the gap, but so what, it was his sort of climb; not too steep and he could keep up a high cadence. As for the difference in the way he climbed the previous day, it was on a hill with a totally different gradient, it was following a rest day and people react differently to rest days in terms of performance. Plus anyone who has done any multi day tours will know that you can feel quite different from day to day and even from hour to hour. Obviously a lot who post on here spend much of their time in chemistry books riding the sofa rather than a bike. If they took their heads out of their conspiracy books they would see that the same guys who were up there two days ago were up there again today. I notice none of them have mentioned Van de Velde who was totally in the hurtbox two days ago and yet he managed to bridge across to Lance today. Why is that I wonder...cuz they don't hate him they only hate LA.

Very well put!!

 

[TRDean]

Can I ask. Do you feel better now?

Really.

Am I that uneducated that I am unworthy of a rebuttal even?

May I say it’s the bright spots on this forum (ie the great majority of people here) that make it enjoyable for many non cyclists to visit, discuss and learn.

If my lack of knowledge is detestable and you’d all prefer people such as myself leave then please make note on the entry page the high and mighty requirements to post in this room.

(are you American?)

I'm from America...so whats your point? Come out and say it...are not all Aussies supposed to be bad azz?

 

[auscyclefan94]

Hahaha. wasn't anderson on one of the major teams in the 80's who had doping suspicions.

 

[BroDeal]

I'm from America...so whats your point? Come out and say it...are not all Aussies supposed to be bad azz?

Isn't that supposed to be bad oz?

 

[Indurain]

Hahaha. wasn't anderson on one of the major teams in the 80's who had doping suspicions.

And therefore the reason why he knows Armstrong is full of crap

 

[mordor]

Remember Vaughters and Andreu's IM conversation that leaked onto the internet? Motorbikes with refrigerated paniers. Of course they won't have bags of blood and vials of CERA on the bus that has ASTANA written as big as life on it.

For Tomalaris to be so daft as to imply to Phil Anderson (an ex pro of some repute) that because the Gendarmes did not find doping products on the Astana bus means they are all clean is unbelievably naive.

If my memory serves Contador was a VERY weak time triallist, a year later he is one of the best in the world. But I bet its because he trains hard and tweaked his saddle height in the off season

 

[Skip Madness]

If my memory serves Contador was a VERY weak time triallist, a year later he is one of the best in the world. But I bet its because he trains hard and tweaked his saddle height in the off season

Your memory does not serve you correctly. Contador has never been a weak time triallist, and certainly wasn't last year.

2008 Vuelta time trial (42.5km) - 4th place
2008 Giro time trial (28.5km) - 11th place (after a change in wind direction negatively affected the later riders, including Contador)
2008 Giro time trial (39.4km) - 2nd place
2008 Vuelta a Castilla y León (9.7km) - 1st place
2008 Vuelta al País Vasco (20km) - 1st place

2007 Tour de France (55.5km) - 5th place
2007 Tour de France - (54km) - 7th place
2007 Vuelta a Castilla y León (10km) - 5th place
2007 Paris - Nice (4.7km) - 5th place

2006 Tour de Romandie (20.4km) - 7th place
2006 Vuelta al País Vasco (24km) - 8th place
2006 Paris-Nice (4.8km) - 4th place

2005 Vuelta al País Vasco (9.3km) - 1st place

2003 Tour de Pologne (19km) - 1st place

2002 Vuelt a Palencia (28.7km) - 1st place

I find people having suspicions about Contador understandable given his links to Operación Puerto and his incredible performances, including at this Tour. But I have a problem with people getting facts wrong to exacerbate their suspicions. It was the same with Stefan Schumacher at last year's Tour - Schumacher had always been someone many of us had suspected for a long time of being on the juice, but at the same time many people acted as though his time trial wins last year came from nowhere, even though he had a history as a very strong time triallist.

 

[elapid]

Nice summary of Contador's TTing performances. Contador actually was considered a TTer first and then developed into a climber. Maybe, like LeMond, you should be questioning his climbing ability rather than his TTing ability? But then again he is light, explosive, and can maintain power for long periods of time, so why shouldn't he be a good climber? I too think that Contador dopes, and obviously his links with OP are damning, but this kid has had pedigree for a long time and is a quite phenomenal stage racer.

 

[blackcat]

Your memory does not serve you correctly. Contador has never been a weak time triallist, and certainly wasn't last year.

2008 Vuelta time trial (42.5km) - 4th place
2008 Giro time trial (28.5km) - 11th place (after a change in wind direction negatively affected the later riders, including Contador)
2008 Giro time trial (39.4km) - 2nd place
2008 Vuelta a Castilla y León (9.7km) - 1st place
2008 Vuelta al País Vasco (20km) - 1st place

2007 Tour de France (55.5km) - 5th place
2007 Tour de France - (54km) - 7th place
2007 Vuelta a Castilla y León (10km) - 5th place
2007 Paris - Nice (4.7km) - 5th place

2006 Tour de Romandie (20.4km) - 7th place
2006 Vuelta al País Vasco (24km) - 8th place
2006 Paris-Nice (4.8km) - 4th place

2005 Vuelta al País Vasco (9.3km) - 1st place

2003 Tour de Pologne (19km) - 1st place

2002 Vuelt a Palencia (28.7km) - 1st place

I find people having suspicions about Contador understandable given his links to Operación Puerto and his incredible performances, including at this Tour. But I have a problem with people getting facts wrong to exacerbate their suspicions. It was the same with Stefan Schumacher at last year's Tour - Schumacher had always been someone many of us had suspected for a long time of being on the juice, but at the same time many people acted as though his time trial wins last year came from nowhere, even though he had a history as a very strong time triallist.

he always used to bust out a performance in the Paris Nice prologue.

2 types of prologue riders. The sprinters and explosive guys, doing it anaerobic and power. And the chrono riders.

AC was a chrono rider, and it demonstrated his power in class fields.

I believe he won the u23 Spanish tt in his first year as an espoir, and Saiz signed him on the spot. May be apocryphal.

But point is, the guy could ALWAYS kick a test, and I have been saying this.

If you look at Wiggins in the u23 Worlds tt, it was not impressive. Think there was only one result by memory, and it was between 20-30. In the u23 Worlds. He was not a natural tter. The first tt he really produced a performance, was the 2005 Worlds tt. He was 5th.

Now, there may have been 4 guys charging ahead of Wiggins. But was he? He has obscured much of his career with these last 3 weeks.

 

[Anonymous]

Phil is the only 80s pro rider I have met, day two of 04 TDF just after they went into the underpass to leave central Liege, I was with a Kiwi guy and some old French guy said the name Anderson to us as we passed. My friend demanded to know where and there he was just getting into his minibus to go to The Koppenberg. He was incredibly friendly to his hero worshipper, a 6 foot two 18 stone muscle man. Phil was in amazing shape and had pr dripping from him unless as I suspect he is just a great fella. Andy followed his exploits fervently as a kid and he was like a puppy, he never came down all day long. I think if you bought him enough drink and never asked a direct question that he would tell you everything but as I don't drink you will need to meet your own Micky Finn. He does bike tours and this would have been one of his big pay days, he seemed totally unphased by anything. As for him being a touche brag, yeah I'd say he's netted a few but that they say is the price you have to pay, bums the word. Great fella, great advert for shampoo.

 

[beroepsrenner]

Ando is one of the most down to earth no BS people you will ever meet in cycling. I caught up with him at a back yard BBQ last summer and he hasnt changed a bit. He tells it as it is.

 

[wigglytoes]

Leadership qualities

When Johan Bruyneel was hired by Astana, my thought was that they had had enough of getting caught doping, and they needed someone who knew how to get away with it.

 

[Bagster]

Why do you always have to be offensive? Almost every post that you write is offensive. Remember this is the Clinic Forum and it is about speculation.

Well whether something is offensive depends on the reader taking offense at what it written. I don't think I write offensively, I maybe write aggressively. Why do I do that? Well in part because I get sick of people like you slagging off Armstrong every chance they get, writing totally non-objective comments that are based on little or no knowledge of the facts and making every move Armstrong makes into some sort of dope fuelled conspiracy theory. If anyone dares to write something in support of Armstrong he is immediately written off by certain posters on here as a "fanboy' and somehow therefore not worthy of a sensible comment. There is little thought about how that might offend people like myself but they(you) don't seem to like it when things are reversed.

If you were in any form objective you would have to admit that LA's comeback has been a success. He is currently in third place on the podium and likely to stay there barring incidents. He has not been shelled out the back like you and several others were loudly proclaiming two weeks ago, and he is riding away from a number of GC pretenders such as Evans, Sastre, Menchov and a few other wannabees. Yet you still can't bring yourselves to say that the guy is having a great tour, sitting in third place alongside guys 10 years his junior.....I find that offensive and totally lacking in objectivity.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

To Bagster: You are a Lance supporter- that has been apparent from when you have first posted.
I have disagreed with many of your points however I have never personally attacked you as you are entitled to your point of view.
But in reference to this opinion -

.....He has not been shelled out the back like you and several others were loudly proclaiming two weeks ago, and he is riding away from a number of GC pretenders such as Evans, Sastre, Menchov and a few other wannabees. Yet you still can't bring yourselves to say that the guy is having a great tour, sitting in third place alongside guys 10 years his junior.....I find that offensive and totally lacking in objectivity.

How dare you question the thoughts and opinions of someone who has always kept their opinion firmly on the doping argument and has always been objective and fair in their analysis and observations.

Please show me the thread where Escarabajo has ever said that Armstrong was going to be "shelled out the back".

You mentioned 'objectivity' in you post - that is lacking in your response when you make a personal attack on someone who quite correctly - imo -found your original post 'offensive'.

 

[Anonymous]

Well whether something is offensive depends on the reader taking offense at what it written. I don't think I write offensively, I maybe write aggressively. Why do I do that? Well in part because I get sick of people like you slagging off Armstrong every chance they get, writing totally non-objective comments that are based on little or no knowledge of the facts and making every move Armstrong makes into some sort of dope fuelled conspiracy theory. If anyone dares to write something in support of Armstrong he is immediately written off by certain posters on here as a "fanboy' and somehow therefore not worthy of a sensible comment. There is little thought about how that might offend people like myself but they(you) don't seem to like it when things are reversed.

If you were in any form objective you would have to admit that LA's comeback has been a success. He is currently in third place on the podium and likely to stay there barring incidents. He has not been shelled out the back like you and several others were loudly proclaiming two weeks ago, and he is riding away from a number of GC pretenders such as Evans, Sastre, Menchov and a few other wannabees. Yet you still can't bring yourselves to say that the guy is having a great tour, sitting in third place alongside guys 10 years his junior.....I find that offensive and totally lacking in objectivity.

Every chance they get is offered up by him to the Gods of the Internet to slash and burn in a similar but more entertaining way than he attacks all who would , as he sees it , stand in his way, he does not now, nor ever will own the right to other peoples path, the problem is that it has paid him up to now so until and if the crowds dump him his behaviour will not be modified and he will remain the object of ridicule for many free thinking individuals who neither like his way nor want him as a role model for their all to easily impressed children. He is cotton to the roar, never hears the boos as he thinks it is cheering but in a foreign tongue. Deep down, even for a shallow person, he knows what he is and that is what brings forth the nastiness that he will always be remembered for.

 

[Johnny Colnago]

I know when I moved my saddle up a few mm I started winning Grand Tours left and right. I should be able to complete the double next year by simply switching to white bar tape.

Shame on you guys for not believing Monsieur Armstrong.

 

[Bagster]

Every chance they get is offered up by him to the Gods of the Internet to slash and burn in a similar but more entertaining way than he attacks all who would , as he sees it , stand in his way, he does not now, nor ever will own the right to other peoples path, the problem is that it has paid him up to now so until and if the crowds dump him his behaviour will not be modified and he will remain the object of ridicule for many free thinking individuals who neither like his way nor want him as a role model for their all to easily impressed children. He is cotton to the roar, never hears the boos as he thinks it is cheering but in a foreign tongue. Deep down, even for a shallow person, he knows what he is and that is what brings forth the nastiness that he will always be remembered for.

I think you need to speak to your teacher regarding sentence construction. I'm presuming you are writing in this pseudo intellectual manner in an effort to portray yourself as a deep thinker?

 

[Bagster]

To Bagster: You are a Lance supporter- that has been apparent from when you have first posted.
I have disagreed with many of your points however I have never personally attacked you as you are entitled to your point of view.
But in reference to this opinion -


How dare you question the thoughts and opinions of someone who has always kept their opinion firmly on the doping argument and has always been objective and fair in their analysis and observations.

Please show me the thread where Escarabajo has ever said that Armstrong was going to be "shelled out the back".

You mentioned 'objectivity' in you post - that is lacking in your response when you make a personal attack on someone who quite correctly - imo -found your original post 'offensive'.

Maserati: historically unreliable, prefer Porsches myself. You seem to have set yourself up as the moderating conscience of the forum. Point one Escar's anti Lance obsession comes through loud and clear, you are kidding yourself if you think he is objective and fair. Point two, I don't disagree with him on every point. Point three , yes I am a Lance fan but not obsessively so, I just respect him as a rider and actually as a person who works bloody hard to give something back to society through his foundation which is rare in the self obsessed world of sports. I am objective and its based on years of racing experience. If you check my posts you will see that I shrugged off the nonsense that was being spouted by the anti Lance brigade. Even in the post you quote I called the race as it turned out. I have always thought AC would win, but give credit where credit is due. I am happy to name the Anti-LA posters who were proclaiming his demise on day one and who are even now demeaning his result (eg Brodeal) despite him finishing today with the two top climbers in the world. Is that objective? I hardly think so. I stand by my comments.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Maserati: historically unreliable, prefer Porsches myself. You seem to have set yourself up as the moderating conscience of the forum. Point one Escar's anti Lance obsession comes through loud and clear, you are kidding yourself if you think he is objective and fair. Point two, I don't disagree with him on every point. Point three , yes I am a Lance fan but not obsessively so, I just respect him as a rider and actually as a person who works bloody hard to give something back to society through his foundation which is rare in the self obsessed world of sports. I am objective and its based on years of racing experience. If you check my posts you will see that I shrugged off the nonsense that was being spouted by the anti Lance brigade. Even in the post you quote I called the race as it turned out. I have always thought AC would win, but give credit where credit is due. I am happy to name the Anti-LA posters who were proclaiming his demise on day one and who are even now demeaning his result (eg Brodeal) despite him finishing today with the two top climbers in the world. Is that objective? I hardly think so. I stand by my comments.

Again I will just ask the simple question....
Please show me the thread where Escarabajo has ever said that Armstrong was going to be "shelled out the back".?

So are you saying that if someone has an opinion different to yours that you will launch a personal attack? I am not anti-Lance, but I believe he doped. Am I next for a personal attack?

I never questioned your cycling knowledge - just your objectivity: here is a post from you yesterday...
Your last comment then just shows what a true dipstick you are and wouldn't know a 'cycling situation' if one came up and bit you on the bum! If you think that AC's attack was payback of some sort on Kloden and Armstrong then you are not only insulting the integrity of AC but also showing your total lack of what bike racing is all about. People like you make me sick

I am not a moderator - by all means have your scraps with Bro if that makes you happy -but I fail to see any objectivity when you come in on a thread and make sweeping insinuations on all the participants and then make a personal - and unsubstantiated - attack on someone who rightly imo points out that it was offensive.

 

[BroDeal]

I am happy to name the Anti-LA posters who were proclaiming his demise on day one and who are even now demeaning his result (eg Brodeal) despite him finishing today with the two top climbers in the world. Is that objective? I hardly think so. I stand by my comments.

Links please. Put up or shut up. From the beginning (in June) I said that Armstrong would undoubtedly do exactly what he did before he retired and would have a decent chance of winning the Tour, especially with the soft course.

I'll even help you out some. Right now on the second page of the road forum is the thread "TDF GC - Time to talk". You can check out everyone's predictions there.

 

[Bagster]

Again I will just ask the simple question....
Please show me the thread where Escarabajo has ever said that Armstrong was going to be "shelled out the back".?

So are you saying that if someone has an opinion different to yours that you will launch a personal attack? I am not anti-Lance, but I believe he doped. Am I next for a personal attack?

I never questioned your cycling knowledge - just your objectivity: here is a post from you yesterday...
Your last comment then just shows what a true dipstick you are and wouldn't know a 'cycling situation' if one came up and bit you on the bum! If you think that AC's attack was payback of some sort on Kloden and Armstrong then you are not only insulting the integrity of AC but also showing your total lack of what bike racing is all about. People like you make me sick

I am not a moderator - by all means have your scraps with Bro if that makes you happy -but I fail to see any objectivity when you come in on a thread and make sweeping insinuations on all the participants and then make a personal - and unsubstantiated - attack on someone who rightly imo points out that it was offensive.

Okay: "shelled out the back" was my colloquialism what he said was:
Originally Posted by Escarabajo
My option is not up there. LA won't make the podium. He is wearing himself out more that he used to to during 2001-2005 plus he is older. Sorry, I know you love Lance but it is not going to happen. I see LL and Kloden stronger than him. Kloden don't have a chance either because he is wearing himself out also. Look out for LL.
You can put a different spin on that if you like (I am sure Brodeal will), but in my view he is saying LA will be a non factor. It was his opinion of course and ultimately way of the mark as I predicted it would be, but I agree he was entitled to it.

Your second point: No I couldn't care less about your personal feeling towards Lance or anyone else. What I do care about though are unsubstantiated claims being stated as though they were facts and also challenging the more biased predictions which are based more on negative wishful thinking than any objective analysis. Also I will respond critically to the more absurd postings that purport to be some sort of psycho analysis of what rider were thinking when they performed certain actions.

Third point: The post you quote was an admittedly angry response to one of Rhubroma's more asinine posts, which not only cast a slur on the integrity of Contador but which also made some absurd comments about race strategy, hence my reaction. It was maybe a bit harsh but the post deserved it.

Fourth point: The only "sweeping insinuation" is the one which you are making now. I do not make seeping insinuations, I usually call people by name and will generally quote their post when I do. As to my personally attacking you: I wasn't planning to, you are quite entitled to your opinion, but if you post it on here then I may challenge it if I disagree and I may be quite critical if it merits such criticism. If you consider that a personal attack, what can I say. Several of my early posts were met solely with "another idiot" comments. Not a particularly objective or illuminating response but I didn't cry about it. I may have responded in kind but at least I added some justification for my response.

 

[Bagster]

Links please. Put up or shut up. From the beginning (in June) I said that Armstrong would undoubtedly do exactly what he did before he retired and would have a decent chance of winning the Tour, especially with the soft course.

I'll even help you out some. Right now on the second page of the road forum is the thread "TDF GC - Time to talk". You can check out everyone's predictions there.

Apologies Bro, it may have been your sock puppet, Thoughtforfood, I can't tell you two apart sometimes.

 

[BroDeal]

Apologies Bro, it may have been your sock puppet, Thoughtforfood, I can't tell you two apart sometimes.

Nope, TFF predicted 6th for Armstrong. I guess you will have to find someone else to play the role of your strawman.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

On point 1. I would interpret Escarabajos comments differently - however I will leave that to him to confirm or correct.

Point 2. and 3 are accepted.

Fourth point: The only "sweeping insinuation" is the one which you are making now. I do not make seeping insinuations, I usually call people by name and will generally quote their post when I do. As to my personally attacking you: I wasn't planning to, you are quite entitled to your opinion, but if you post it on here then I may challenge it if I disagree and I may be quite critical if it merits such criticism. If you consider that a personal attack, what can I say. Several of my early posts were met solely with "another idiot" comments. Not a particularly objective or illuminating response but I didn't cry about it. I may have responded in kind but at least I added some justification for my response.

You did not personally attack me - however you did attack Escarabajo.
I did take offense to the fact that you responded to a thread that barely mentioned LA and called all contributers "dopeheads" and made the comment about how we only hate Lance - that imo is sweeping.

I would have no problem to you - or anyone- challenging what I have to say, I joined this forum to learn more - and offer an opinion if I feel I can contribute.
On a final point I agree many of the topics on this side of the forum are just idle speculation but I - as I am sure you do - know how to filter the through the BS. (...we did hit a new low with Phil's facial expression.)

 

[elapid]

I actually like the fact that someone like Dr. Maserati tries to make the peace in some of these threads. I tried a couple of times and was either ignored or shot down in flames. These threads can be great when there is a discussion going on that is argued well and I learn something. But they get tedious and not worth reading when it starts to degenerate into insults and, as Bagster says, uninformed and baseless opinions. Keep up the good work Dr. Maserati.