The Official LANCE ARMSTRONG Thread 2010-2011

[Angliru]

the man who tries to clean up the images of guilty people, SAY IT ISNT SO LANCE!

...and the sound of another bursting bubble. Oh the humanity!

 

[the3verB]

That Eddie has won 11 GTs is a fact.

In a medals table it s the number of gold medals which import. Lance has 7 golds, Eddy has 5 gold and 5 silvers.

Therefore Lance is number 1.

 

[Barrus]

In a medals table it s the number of gold medals which import. Lance has 7 golds, Eddy has 5 gold and 5 silvers.

Therefore Lance is number 1.

anything not the tour is silver? Man, I never knew. That would probably mean that Eddy Merckx is actually just another Poulidor

 

[the3verB]

anything not the tour is silver? Man, I never knew. That would probably mean that Eddy Merckx is actually just another Poulidor

that means that to compare armstrong vs merckx it s not as easy as 11 > 7 therefore Merckx > Armstrong.

 

[Barrus]

that means that to compare armstrong vs merckx it s not as easy as 11 > 7 therefore Merckx > Armstrong.

You said yourself that the tour is gold, the rest is worth less. This is a completely short-sighted manner of looking at pro cycling, one mainly put forth by people who do not know of the history of the sport, the sensitivities, or only view it from one kind of perspective (often this is the anglophone casual fan perspective). The statement is just plain BS.

 

[Jukebox]

that means that to compare armstrong vs merckx it s not as easy as 11 > 7 therefore Merckx > Armstrong.

But the TdF is not even the sport's full scope. Merckx is above Armstrong in every way except TdF victories. I mean, what true classic has Lance won? SS is a semi, as in FW. The WC cannot compare to Eddy's record of 3.

Really, no comparison.

 

[karlboss]

But the TdF is not even the sport's full scope. Merckx is above Armstrong in every way except TdF victories. I mean, what true classic has Lance won? SS is a semi, as in FW. The WC cannot compare to Eddy's record of 3.

Really, no comparison.

To be fair, this clown was talking about best GT rider, and to make it easier, we'll qualify that as best GT GC rider, that way stage victories don't count.

 

[BroDeal]

In a medals table it s the number of gold medals which import. Lance has 7 golds, Eddy has 5 gold and 5 silvers.

Therefore Lance is number 1.

The platinum medal is winning Giro plus the Tour. Armstrong has zero platinum medals. He was too cowardly to even attempt to win on. So Indurain beats him.

 

[boardhanger]

Armstrong specialized solely. Mercyx different era. Indurain started specialization. It's like say Buzz Aldren is a better pilot than Capt. Sullenberg. Who cares they did what they did at that moment and time and did well.

 

[dolophonic]

Epic..... !

 

[flicker]

He hasn't won jack since his return with the exception of a mountain bike race in the U.S. NO WINS IN EUROPE SINCE HIS RETURN. Nada. Hardly call that "still dominates all cyclists alive".

It could be argued that Indurain was at least his equal with 5 straight Tour wins coupled with 2 years that he won the Giro AND the Tour--in consecutive years! Plus Olympic and WC titles in the ITT included in his list of successes.

Granted Lance had a poor year by his standards 2010. To say he is not top tier last year would be wrong, he beat many top riders. Obviously he had problems this year, relationship children taking his time, that darn Floyd, Alberto Grr, aging, running around for his charity + advertising shots, investigation aging kids etc.
I know the haters here have issue but except for the investigation I have had them all.

 

[Mellow Velo]

The platinum medal is winning Giro plus the Tour. Armstrong has zero platinum medals. He was too cowardly to even attempt to win on. So Indurain beats him.

This.
The best GT rider ever would have had to have completed the magic double.
A simple truth.

Also, people who see the Tour as incompatible, above all others, don't seemed to realise that at one time, the Tour struggled to raise a field, while the Giro was contested by the cream of the sport.

 

[StyrbjornSterki]

Granted Lance had a poor year by his standards 2010. To say he is not top tier last year would be wrong, he beat many top riders....

Like Oscar Pereiro "beat" many good riders in the 2006 TdF? All that LA's 3rd in the 2009 TdF signifies is that the other danger men all destroyed themselves trying to catch AC & AS.

In his two year un-retirement, LA has failed to win a single stage in events he used to dominate. The only thing that remains world class about him is his ego.

 

[Cobblestoned]

This is a great clip !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2-2iBE9EWM

 

[karlboss]

Like Oscar Pereiro "beat" many good riders in the 2006 TdF? All that LA's 3rd in the 2009 TdF signifies is that the other danger men all destroyed themselves trying to catch AC & AS.

In his two year un-retirement, LA has failed to win a single stage in events he used to dominate. The only thing that remains world class about him is his ego.

Credit where credit is due, the only other guys who could have beaten Lance, in this type of race were Frank Schleck and Andreas Kloden, were they not riding for their team "leaders". Who destroyed themselves chasing AC and AS when? Hell even take it as Armstrong comes 10th he still beat loads of good riders.

Pereiro, won the 2006 tour, was he the strongest? no, but he wasn't weak. Losing time was a tactic that worked. Take out the 2 stages where he lost and then gained his time, he'd have finshed about 5th. If the strongest rider always won, then we could watch guys pedal on trainers and follow power output.

 

[Cobblestoned]

Credit where credit is due, the only other guys who could have beaten Lance, in this type of race were Frank Schleck and Andreas Kloden, were they not riding for their team "leaders". Who destroyed themselves chasing AC and AS when? Hell even take it as Armstrong comes 10th he still beat loads of good riders.

Pereiro, won the 2006 tour, was he the strongest? no, but he wasn't weak. Losing time was a tactic that worked. Take out the 2 stages where he lost and then gained his time, he'd have finshed about 5th. If the strongest rider always won, then we could watch guys pedal on trainers and follow power output.

I will never forgive Klöden and T-Mobile for that.

 

[karlboss]

I will never forgive Klöden and T-Mobile for that.

2006 was t-mobile's for the taking, Landis or no Landis.

 

[heythorp]

I didnt want to F up the ToU thread

This is in reponse to the ToU race. I dont think it should be in that thread, but the anti lance crowd cant help themselves and the mods on this board are, oh I don't know, worthless.

Boswell already shows more stage race promise than Lance ever did before his Ferrari days.

This is what is wrong with the fabulous five on this board. You guys make this a Lance thing no matter what the topic is about. LA not at this race. No one else has mentioned him and here we go.

LL is also an *** becuase he raced the ToU. We have read it numerous times. Where is the mention about the good sportsmenship to gift the win. And yes he did gift the win today.

Funny when a pro lance thread pops up its troll, same old same old, too many LA threads etc.... but the fact of the matter is the haters start more LA threads then the tea baggers.

Lets talk about racing and leave the LA stuff to the LA thread as intended and forced to the public by the fab Five.

Link to thread
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=320565&posted=1#post320565

And now lets hurl the fanboy, lance lover, **** at me too. right? just because my post count is low. The fact is the breaking news at CN is that the fab 5 is the reason for the lack of participation.

Flexing the beer muscles. now hurry and go read my previous posts to point out what I have and have not posted on.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

This is in reponse to the ToU race. I dont think it should be in that thread, but the anti lance crowd cant help themselves and the mods on this board are, oh I don't know, worthless.



This is what is wrong with the fabulous five on this board. You guys make this a Lance thing no matter what the topic is about. LA not at this race. No one else has mentioned him and here we go.

LL is also an *** becuase he raced the ToU. We have read it numerous times. Where is the mention about the good sportsmenship to gift the win. And yes he did gift the win today.

Funny when a pro lance thread pops up its troll, same old same old, too many LA threads etc.... but the fact of the matter is the haters start more LA threads then the tea baggers.

Lets talk about racing and leave the LA stuff to the LA thread as intended and forced to the public by the fab Five.

Link to thread
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=320565&posted=1#post320565

And now lets hurl the fanboy, lance lover, **** at me too. right? just because my post count is low. The fact is the breaking news at CN is that the fab 5 is the reason for the lack of participation.

Flexing the beer muscles. now hurry and go read my previous posts to point out what I have and have not posted on.

The Tour of Utah went 14 pages before a mention of LA? (Whether you like it or not, he is the most recognised name in American cycling).

Are you suggesting that any comments on Lance should be excempt?

Or is your complaint the manner of his introduction in to the thread?

Which could be fair -did you report that post, or come here? If you reported the post, what did the mods say that means they are worthless?

 

[heythorp]

The Tour of Utah went 14 pages before a mention of LA? (Whether you like it or not, he is the most recognised name in American cycling).

Not denying that, but you have to admit there is no reason for it and the fact is if it was a pro LA argument the Fab Five ( my name for it not a proven number or anything) would be all over it with the above complaints.

Are you suggesting that any comments on Lance should be excempt?Or is your complaint the manner of his introduction in to the thread?

Yes my problem is that LA did not need to be introduced. I agree if he is relevent than lets talk about it, but could someone please give me the agrument in this case. Oh and lets be honest.

Which could be fair -did you report that post, or come here? If you reported the post, what did the mods say that means they are worthless?

To be honest and fair, no I did not report the post, but lets be honest here. The mods are way more in favor of the fab 5 bashing and being an ***( I should add I am not necessaraly putting MK in the fab 5, but if you think you belong then I guess you do, I personally am just using that name because there is always a group on all message boards that rule the roost) than a newbie or any other member, not to mention their rants in subjects that are off topic.

The ToU thing was just the straw in my cap sort of thing. No ryhme or reason for it and everyone knows it. Everone on this board has to be sick and tired of it by now.

I really enjoy the knowledge here, I am just getting tired of board hoping because there is always the favorite 10 or 15 people who runin it for the masses. Many (including the fab 5) have lots to contribute and I enjoy it, but they are more relentless than BMC or any of the tea baggers. Lets just talk about cycling. If the haters here would just talk about cycling and ignor the other crap we might actually have an online community that talks about cycling for a change.

I also find that the "locals" are the most blatant vilotators of the rules here(as is true on all boards). JMO


Edit:

Maybe this was his reason:

Lance was 24 when he won his first Tour du Pont, I believe, though he finished 2nd the year earlier.

Boswell is 19.

But if it was, it would be better to say so off the bat then (my fault) let the insuations run wild. Which you really cant blame someone on this forum for doing. I still find it a stretch to mention him in this ToU thread.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Not denying that, but you have to admit there is no reason for it and the fact is if it was a pro LA argument the Fab Five ( my name for it not a proven number or anything) would be all over it with the above complaints.



Yes my problem is that LA did not need to be introduced. I agree if he is relevent than lets talk about it, but could someone please give me the agrument in this case. Oh and lets be honest.



To be honest and fair, no I did not report the post, but lets be honest here. The mods are way more in favor of the fab 5 bashing and being an ***( I should add I am not necessaraly putting MK in the fab 5, but if you think you belong then I guess you do, I personally am just using that name because there is always a group on all message boards that rule the roost) than a newbie or any other member, not to mention their rants in subjects that are off topic.

The ToU thing was just the straw in my cap sort of thing. No ryhme or reason for it and everyone knows it. Everone on this board has to be sick and tired of it by now.

I really enjoy the knowledge here, I am just getting tired of board hoping because there is always the favorite 10 or 15 people who runin it for the masses. Many (including the fab 5) have lots to contribute and I enjoy it, but they are more relentless than BMC or any of the tea baggers. Lets just talk about cycling. If the haters here would just talk about cycling and ignor the other crap we might actually have an online community that talks about cycling for a change.

I also find that the "locals" are the most blatant vilotators of the rules here. JMO

Ok - I stopped at the "The mods are way more in favor of the fab 5 bashing and being an ***..."

You are accusing the mods of favouratism for a "fab 5" (which you admit making up) - for not taking action on a post that you did not highlight?


I have now read the rest of your post - nice to see you are trying to include me, any basis for that?

I find it difficult to take your position seriously when in the above post you refer to others as "teabaggers" and "haters" - if your position is that posts should not go 'off-topic' then the same viewpoint should apply to the 13,000 here and not just a 'fab 5'.

 

[ManInFull]

Credit where credit is due, the only other guys who could have beaten Lance, in this type of race were Frank Schleck and Andreas Kloden, were they not riding for their team "leaders". Who destroyed themselves chasing AC and AS when? Hell even take it as Armstrong comes 10th he still beat loads of good riders.

Pereiro, won the 2006 tour, was he the strongest? no, but he wasn't weak. Losing time was a tactic that worked. Take out the 2 stages where he lost and then gained his time, he'd have finshed about 5th. If the strongest rider always won, then we could watch guys pedal on trainers and follow power output.

Yes, prior to 2006, I believe that Pereiro had been a top 20 or maybe even a top 15 finisher for a number of years. For some reasons, the peleton decided to let him get in a successful break that ended up putting double-digit minutes into the main GC contenders. Allow a very good rider to gain minutes and he will be a very serious threat.

 

[heythorp]

I have now read the rest of your post - nice to see you are trying to include me, any basis for that?
'.

Sorry, I was not pointing a finger at you. It was a general statement towards anyone who thought they belonged. I can understand that by the way I wrote that my point did not come across correctly.


And yes there is a strong bias here by the mods. Not sure the reasons but it certainly exists.

I should state that I am aware of the temporary banning of some of my fictitious fab 5.

 

[karlboss]

Yes, prior to 2006, I believe that Pereiro had been a top 20 or maybe even a top 15 finisher for a number of years. For some reasons, the peleton decided to let him get in a successful break that ended up putting double-digit minutes into the main GC contenders. Allow a very good rider to gain minutes and he will be a very serious threat.

1 Lance Armstrong (USA) Discovery Channel
2 Ivan Basso (Ita) Team CSC 4.40
3 Jan Ullrich (Ger) T-Mobile Team 6.21
4 Francisco Mancebo (Spa) Illes Balears-Caisse d'Epargne 9.59
5 Alexandre Vinokourov (Kaz) T-Mobile Team 11.01
6 Levi Leipheimer (USA) Gerolsteiner 11.21
7 Michael Rasmussen (Den) Rabobank 11.33
8 Cadel Evans (Aus) Davitamon-Lotto 11.55
9 Floyd Landis (USA) Phonak Hearing Systems 12.44
10 Oscar Pereiro Sio (Spa) Phonak Hearing Systems 16.04

Riders in Bold didn't start in 2006, so based on 2005 Pereiro was going in ranked 5th.

 

[ozerulz]

>>This is in reponse to the ToU race. I dont think it should be in that thread, but the anti lance crowd cant help themselves and the mods on this board are, oh I don't know, worthless.<<

Dude whatever. I love this site for 2 reasons. 1)Vino has his own thread where he is rightfully worshipped and 2)People openly bash the great Lance Armstrong here. It's great that there is a place where Saint Armstrong isn't the end all be all of the cycling world. If it offends you so much then leave. Don't read the posts and take your business elsewhere. I'm sure you'll find yourself right at home at http://www.halfanut.com