• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

R.E.S.P.E.C.T. to Chris Horner

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Wallace said:
With all due respect Hitch, I think you're missing the point here. Levi, Julich and other Americans have all won some races in Europe. That disqualifies them as being "talented" which is totally different from having results. Talent is the opposite of winning, it amounts to a kind of moral and spiritual quality, that ineffable how do you say it, je ne sais quoi, which certain riders have, and which marks them as a breed apart. Hinault didn't have it, Indurain didn't have--maybe no European rider has ever it it. :confused: But you know it when you see it. It's that gleam in the eye Horner has, as the sunlight reflects off his head, it's a grandeur of spirit which embiggens his small stature and palmares, it goes beyond winning, and the sport itself. It is "Talent," which only shows itself to those who know how to see beyond the shallow trappings of success lesser mortals value. As Eddy M once said, "Winners never quit, and real winners never really win." Or something like that.

ok.........................................................................................................................................but you need the "talent" nonetheless to win ........
 
Wallace said:
With all due respect Hitch, I think you're missing the point here. Levi, Julich and other Americans have all won some races in Europe. That disqualifies them as being "talented" which is totally different from having results. Talent is the opposite of winning, it amounts to a kind of moral and spiritual quality, that ineffable how do you say it, je ne sais quoi, which certain riders have, and which marks them as a breed apart. Hinault didn't have it, Indurain didn't have--maybe no European rider has ever it it. But you know it when you see it. It's that gleam in the eye Horner has, as the sunlight reflects off his head, it's a grandeur of spirit which embiggens his small stature and palmares, it goes beyond winning, and the sport itself. It is "Talent," which only shows itself to those who know how to see beyond the shallow trappings of success lesser mortals value. As Eddy M once said, "Winners never quit, and real winners never really win." Or something like that.
I've read this, or tried to read this a couple of times and I'm just not understanding it. Is it missing one of these- ;) ? :confused:
 
May 14, 2010
4,833
2
0
Wallace said:
With all due respect Hitch, I think you're missing the point here. Levi, Julich and other Americans have all won some races in Europe. That disqualifies them as being "talented" which is totally different from having results. Talent is the opposite of winning, it amounts to a kind of moral and spiritual quality, that ineffable how do you say it, je ne sais quoi, which certain riders have, and which marks them as a breed apart. Hinault didn't have it, Indurain didn't have--maybe no European rider has ever it it. But you know it when you see it. It's that gleam in the eye Horner has, as the sunlight reflects off his head, it's a grandeur of spirit which embiggens his small stature and palmares, it goes beyond winning, and the sport itself. It is "Talent," which only shows itself to those who know how to see beyond the shallow trappings of success lesser mortals value. As Eddy M once said, "Winners never quit, and real winners never really win." Or something like that.
:D Lol. That's actually pretty good. And second only to talent is class.
 
Wallace said:
With all due respect Hitch, I think you're missing the point here. Levi, Julich and other Americans have all won some races in Europe. That disqualifies them as being "talented" which is totally different from having results. Talent is the opposite of winning, it amounts to a kind of moral and spiritual quality, that ineffable how do you say it, je ne sais quoi, which certain riders have, and which marks them as a breed apart. Hinault didn't have it, Indurain didn't have--maybe no European rider has ever it it. But you know it when you see it. It's that gleam in the eye Horner has, as the sunlight reflects off his head, it's a grandeur of spirit which embiggens his small stature and palmares, it goes beyond winning, and the sport itself. It is "Talent," which only shows itself to those who know how to see beyond the shallow trappings of success lesser mortals value. As Eddy M once said, "Winners never quit, and real winners never really win." Or something like that.
You make it sound amazing. You have real talent for that. ;)
But I don't agree.
 
May 17, 2010
40
0
0
Love the guy but it would not surprise me at all if he was found to be dirty. When he was riding up Sierra last year like he was on a Ducati I thought that he was riding a bit too good for someone of his vintage. Then I heard something like 6.6w/kg and really thought hmmmmmmmm........
 
Mar 31, 2010
16,174
0
0
magoo34 said:
Love the guy but it would not surprise me at all if he was found to be dirty. When he was riding up Sierra last year like he was on a Ducati I thought that he was riding a bit too good for someone of his vintage. Then I heard something like 6.6w/kg and really thought hmmmmmmmm........
6.6 watt per kg weight is nothing extraordinary and why don't you go to the clinic? there you can talk with your kind :rolleyes:

quintana had 7.2 watt per kg weight after 8 days in avenir up the final mountain itt for instance.
 
Wallace said:
With all due respect Hitch, I think you're missing the point here. Levi, Julich and other Americans have all won some races in Europe. That disqualifies them as being "talented" which is totally different from having results. Talent is the opposite of winning, it amounts to a kind of moral and spiritual quality, that ineffable how do you say it, je ne sais quoi, which certain riders have, and which marks them as a breed apart. Hinault didn't have it, Indurain didn't have--maybe no European rider has ever it it. But you know it when you see it. It's that gleam in the eye Horner has, as the sunlight reflects off his head, it's a grandeur of spirit which embiggens his small stature and palmares, it goes beyond winning, and the sport itself. It is "Talent," which only shows itself to those who know how to see beyond the shallow trappings of success lesser mortals value. As Eddy M once said, "Winners never quit, and real winners never really win." Or something like that.
You make no sense at all. By your definition Contador has no talent. What you are talking about is charisma and integrity and some winners do have it. I see Horner as a guy who loves his sport and what he does and most people agree that if he had more opportunities when he was younger he would have been more successful and "less talented ?" I would say that Horner is happy even without winning but still likes to win. Jens Voight is similar. Horner is a very likeable guy. I have never seen one interview with him that was less than interesting.
 
Mar 18, 2009
715
0
0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZcM_gAQEoE

Andy Hampsten, shredding the breakaway and going on to win the queen stage of the 1992 Tour by a huge margin. Not only has Horner never done anything comparable, he's never shown any signs of being able to do anything comparable. And yet some posters here insist that Horner is an American cyclist as the same level as Hampsten. When I asked about results, I was told, "I'm talking about talent, not results." This is either totally meaningless, or it just means "I really really really like Horner, so I'm going to insist he's a huge talent." Absent results, all you have is speculation and personal preference.

I like Horner: he's an excellent domestique. I was furious when Lotto let him go and picked up Euroslob Popobytch in his stead, because I knew it meant Evans' Tour chances were screwed. And they were. Horner is a credible American racer, an excellent GT support rider and a guy who has a chance at a solid placing in second tier races (although there'll always be a Nibali or someone around who gets the top step). Unless you're talking about "talent" or "class" or some entirely personal intangible, in which case, sure, he's like the best that's ever put lycra to saddle.

As for "likable," who gives a **** about that?

*rant off*
 
Sep 25, 2010
71
0
0
Wallace said:
it's a grandeur of spirit which embiggens his small stature and palmares, it goes beyond winning, and the sport itself.
a perfectly cromulent use of that neologism. only a true simpsons acolyte would make use of it in a cycling forum.
 
Aug 16, 2010
79
0
0
Wallace said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZcM_gAQEoE

Andy Hampsten, shredding the breakaway and going on to win the queen stage of the 1992 Tour by a huge margin. Not only has Horner never done anything comparable, he's never shown any signs of being able to do anything comparable. And yet some posters here insist that Horner is an American cyclist as the same level as Hampsten. When I asked about results, I was told, "I'm talking about talent, not results." This is either totally meaningless, or it just means "I really really really like Horner, so I'm going to insist he's a huge talent." Absent results, all you have is speculation and personal preference.

I like Horner: he's an excellent domestique. I was furious when Lotto let him go and picked up Euroslob Popobytch in his stead, because I knew it meant Evans' Tour chances were screwed. And they were. Horner is a credible American racer, an excellent GT support rider and a guy who has a chance at a solid placing in second tier races (although there'll always be a Nibali or someone around who gets the top step). Unless you're talking about "talent" or "class" or some entirely personal intangible, in which case, sure, he's like the best that's ever put lycra to saddle.

As for "likable," who gives a **** about that?

*rant off*
Horner has got the first step many times!

Pays Basque and California for example..
 
He did well. I hope he can go well at the TOC, ride the TDF and maybe just want to ride the Vuelta.
Kudos to him for coming 2nd at T-A after his injury. Hopefully he rides out the last few years of his career in a good way.
 
Wallace said:
With all due respect Hitch, I think you're missing the point here. Levi, Julich and other Americans have all won some races in Europe. That disqualifies them as being "talented" which is totally different from having results. Talent is the opposite of winning, it amounts to a kind of moral and spiritual quality, that ineffable how do you say it, je ne sais quoi, which certain riders have, and which marks them as a breed apart. Hinault didn't have it, Indurain didn't have--maybe no European rider has ever it it. But you know it when you see it. It's that gleam in the eye Horner has, as the sunlight reflects off his head, it's a grandeur of spirit which embiggens his small stature and palmares, it goes beyond winning, and the sport itself. It is "Talent," which only shows itself to those who know how to see beyond the shallow trappings of success lesser mortals value. As Eddy M once said, "Winners never quit, and real winners never really win." Or something like that.
Good arguments but Levi must still be considered talented. Also Eddy was a real talent/ defined the idea- yet he won... a lot.
 
movingtarget said:
You make no sense at all. By your definition Contador has no talent. What you are talking about is charisma and integrity and some winners do have it. I see Horner as a guy who loves his sport and what he does and most people agree that if he had more opportunities when he was younger he would have been more successful and "less talented ?" I would say that Horner is happy even without winning but still likes to win. Jens Voight is similar. Horner is a very likeable guy. I have never seen one interview with him that was less than interesting.
I don't think in Horner's case it was a lack of opportunity but an inability to adapt to his new surroundings in his first tenure in Europe. He had the talent back then but I'd have to compare it to a Spanish rider going to a Dutch team, not speaking the same language, not able to adapt to the change in culture, and all of this having an adverse effect on performance. They get homesick and are way out of their comfort zone. Horner was almost a man among boys when he raced in the US. I recall a performance of his I believe at what I think was a race in San Francisco, on it's steep hilly streets. It was such a dominant and impressive display that it made any one watching wonder why he was wasting his years in the states and not racing with the elite professionals in Europe.
 
Angliru said:
I don't think in Horner's case it was a lack of opportunity but an inability to adapt to his new surroundings in his first tenure in Europe. He had the talent back then but I'd have to compare it to a Spanish rider going to a Dutch team, not speaking the same language, not able to adapt to the change in culture, and all of this having an adverse effect on performance. They get homesick and are way out of their comfort zone. Horner was almost a man among boys when he raced in the US. I recall a performance of his I believe at what I think was a race in San Francisco, on it's steep hillY streets. It was such a dominant and impressive display that it made any one watching wonder why he was wasting his years in the states and not racing with the elite professionals in Europe.
Fair point. Some of the Aussie riders have had similar problems and quite a few are now racing in the USA. I meant when he was a domestique later in his career. He was probably wasted as a domestique in Europe but he was a great one and still is even though he still manages to win good races. I thought his performance in the TOC last year was pretty amazing considering his age, even if many of the best European riders were not there.
 
movingtarget said:
Fair point. Some of the Aussie riders have had similar problems and quite a few are now racing in the USA. I meant when he was a domestique later in his career. He was probably wasted as a domestique in Europe but he was a great one and still is even though he still manages to win good races. I thought his performance in the TOC last year was pretty amazing considering his age, even if many of the best European riders were not there.
I'ts interesting to realize the highlights of his career have occured due the "lack of leadership" in the teams he's been part of over the last 2 years-and because of that- he'd be off domestique duties & seeking his own ambitions-which nonetheless have paid off.
 
Jun 19, 2009
4,841
0
0
Angliru said:
I don't think in Horner's case it was a lack of opportunity but an inability to adapt to his new surroundings in his first tenure in Europe. He had the talent back then but I'd have to compare it to a Spanish rider going to a Dutch team, not speaking the same language, not able to adapt to the change in culture, and all of this having an adverse effect on performance. They get homesick and are way out of their comfort zone. Horner was almost a man among boys when he raced in the US. I recall a performance of his I believe at what I think was a race in San Francisco, on it's steep hilly streets. It was such a dominant and impressive display that it made any one watching wonder why he was wasting his years in the states and not racing with the elite professionals in Europe.
He won the Olympic Trials RR in Seattle humbling the entire Motorola Mafia. He rode smart and hurt them when it counted and that is an honest measure of his stature-he always had more talent than Ochowicz's understudies and that includes Lance. It is also the reason he didn't get selected because Carmichael wanted to highlight his pony. Nothing more and nothing less. Faced with that level of Continental cronyism he didn't have a choice but to go to Europe and he did that trip clean. The result is well known; he came home and cracked heads in the US.

His results are honest in the context of pro riders in Europe but I wouldn't characterize them beyond that definition.
Andy Hampsten raced clean. Thurlow is a mutant by all reckoning and Roy Knickman may have been the most physically gifted rider on Seven-11. He raced clean and that didn't work in France. In the scheme of things Chris is up there and definitely fun to watch.
 
Mar 18, 2009
715
0
0
Oldman said:
He won the Olympic Trials RR in Seattle humbling the entire Motorola Mafia. He rode smart and hurt them when it counted and that is an honest measure of his stature-he always had more talent than Ochowicz's understudies and that includes Lance. It is also the reason he didn't get selected because Carmichael wanted to highlight his pony. Nothing more and nothing less. Faced with that level of Continental cronyism he didn't have a choice but to go to Europe and he did that trip clean. The result is well known; he came home and cracked heads in the US.

His results are honest in the context of pro riders in Europe but I wouldn't characterize them beyond that definition.
Andy Hampsten raced clean. Thurlow is a mutant by all reckoning and Roy Knickman may have been the most physically gifted rider on Seven-11. He raced clean and that didn't work in France. In the scheme of things Chris is up there and definitely fun to watch.
Armstrong wasn't even at the Seattle race, Hampsten's handlebars broke, Hincapie crashed, and Horner managed to outsprint... Frankie Andreau? And on the basis of this one day you're arguing that Horner is more talented than Lance, Julich, Hampsten? You could be totally right. Or it could also be that on that one day, for a number of reasons, Motorola had a bad day when Horner had a really good one.

I'd also say that the whole "didn't have the career he deserved" is a little dubious, since Horner seems to be having a career renaissance riding for Bruyneel. And that anything further on this topic should be over in the clinic.

I like Horner--I remember watching him outsprint Nate Reiss in the 1996 Tour DuPont when Phil and Paul were totally sure that Horner didn't have a chance. I also remember how totally pi$$ed Reiss was. So I've been following the guy for a long time. He's an excellent domestique (as was Knickman), which is not to dis him at all. It's an honorable and important role in the sport.
 
May 3, 2010
538
0
0
BillytheKid said:
Yes, the Giro or the Veulta would be better. I think he's looking down the road at what the H$$$ he's going to do with the rest of his life. The Cali and the TDF give him more face time in the US and possibly endorsement $$ down the road.

He has two or three kids so he's like Jens in that regard. I think he would make a great team director. He would have to give up the candid interviews though.
I don't get why he is so intent on riding as a domestique at the tour de france when radioshack would probably let him be a gc guy at vuelta or giro. I would like to see him get a shot at one of those races.
 
offbyone said:
I don't get why he is so intent on riding as a domestique at the tour de france when radioshack would probably let him be a gc guy at vuelta or giro. I would like to see him get a shot at one of those races.
It's because he is such a good domestique that they need him in the TDF. They see a possible win by Schleck in the TDF as being a superior result to Horner making the podium in one of the other races of course. Everyone wants to participate in the Tour because that is where you get noticed. If they won't send Schleck to the Giro why would they send Horner ? They should make him team leader in the Vuelta. He could probably still handle two grand tours.
 
Jun 1, 2011
2,441
0
0
movingtarget said:
...in the Tour because that is where you get noticed. If they won't send Schleck to the Giro why would they send Horner ? They should make him team leader in the Vuelta. He could probably still handle two grand tours.
Two grand tours no, but I do agree with getting noticed in the TdF.

Here's I story I missed earlier: The reason I like Chris Horner so much.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/03/news/from-the-pages-of-velo-the-storyteller-chris-horner_209188
 
I'm having an issue with this comment:

"Certainly you have Andy (Schleck). He’s won the (2011) Tour de France now, officially. And if he has the form he had two years ago he can time trial with these guys too, pretty close to them, and he can out-climb all of them. So if you go two years back, through to the Tour and you look how Andy was climbing, there’s not a guy who’s going to be in this year’s Tour de France who can climb with Andy. So the real question fans should be asking is, can Andy arrive at this year’s Tour with the form he had two years ago?"

http://www.bicycling.com/news/pro-cycling/veterans-return?cm_mmc=Twitter-_-Bicycling-_-Content-Story-_-horner-int
 
Jun 19, 2009
4,841
0
0
Wallace said:
Armstrong wasn't even at the Seattle race, Hampsten's handlebars broke, Hincapie crashed, and Horner managed to outsprint... Frankie Andreau? And on the basis of this one day you're arguing that Horner is more talented than Lance, Julich, Hampsten? You could be totally right. Or it could also be that on that one day, for a number of reasons, Motorola had a bad day when Horner had a really good one.

I'd also say that the whole "didn't have the career he deserved" is a little dubious, since Horner seems to be having a career renaissance riding for Bruyneel. And that anything further on this topic should be over in the clinic.

I like Horner--I remember watching him outsprint Nate Reiss in the 1996 Tour DuPont when Phil and Paul were totally sure that Horner didn't have a chance. I also remember how totally pi$$ed Reiss was. So I've been following the guy for a long time. He's an excellent domestique (as was Knickman), which is not to dis him at all. It's an honorable and important role in the sport.
I would not argue any of those guys were more naturally talented than Hampsten but I think Horner could have beaten him on that course anyway. As for Julich, Lance (Levi); they all came from the same chemistry set so their credentials are very skewwed to me. Racing that event alongside some of the US Natz team members who were *****in' about who was getting the "support" was enlightening. There was a pretty clear divide emerging about that time between those stepping up to Euro techniques and those that weren't. Horner seemed to be for real at that time and destined for a good career.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS