What kind of team leaders were Tyler and Floyd?

[Epicycle]

It's crazy to think that Floyd or Tyler had to push anybody at CSC or Phonak to dope. Not with guys like Riis, Pino and Rihs around.

 

[MarkvW]

If Hamilton and Landis had even a smidgen of Armstrong's narcissism we would have seen it in their actions in the peloton, anecdotal evidence from other team mates, fellow riders and TV interviews. Especially as Armstrong would be using it to destroy their credibility.

But as i said this is another thread to make Armstrong look like another ordinary member of the pro peloton,he doped and did all the other stuff to reach the 'level playing field'.

He really really really does deserve his 7 TdF wins because he competed against the big dopers and he levelled the playing field with his doping but it was his high cadence, 6 hours a day on the bike and weight loss due to fighting and destroying the cancer in his body that really made the difference.

give it over. you aint gonna convince anyone.

Take Armstrong's 7 wins away and they're only going to go to another doper.

 

[Benotti69]

Take Armstrong's 7 wins away and they're only going to go to another doper.

Maybe but a doper who didn't bully, lie and bribe his way to winning, just merely doped

But it may not neccessarily be unless you believe every rider in the TdF is doping, which maybe your argument to try and justify Armstrong's doping.

Sandy Casar finished 24th in 2005 and he might be the legitimate winner considering the list of riders and teams ahead of him

 

[Cloxxki]

As I've read Floyd's accounts, he was just running a personalized program based on what he'd learned at USPS. At some point sharing some of the logistics with Levi, for hassle and costs.
That's a quite a bit different that USPS where riders were offered code colored lunch bags. And where the #1 rider demanded to be led up the mountain higher than anyone ever had a Tour winner.
Perhaps Floyd may have felt concerned for his helpers, asking them whether they had their program covered, or needed some help from him with that.

What strikes me as interesting, is that apparently Floyd managed to win one on a pretty basic self-run program with a weak team, whereas Lance would have Ferrari on speed dial, and AOL or whatever. And, rumored to even have a personal drug such as HemAssist to get an edge even over equally talented and trained team mates. Seems that Floyd, although getting realistically not more than 2 or 3 wins had he been protected by the UCI, still must have been a hugely talented rider.

 

[hrotha]

It's weird, Phonak was quite obviously one of the dirtiest teams around, but from what I gather most everybody there went solo. No doubt they were encouraged, and if a rider asked for directions they'd get them (and I suppose it helps that they always signed seasoned riders who already knew how things were done), but still you'd expect such a dirty team to have a teamwide program.

Of course, Phonak was a bit of a wreck anyway.

 

[Benotti69]

As I've read Floyd's accounts, he was just running a personalized program based on what he'd learned at USPS. At some point sharing some of the logistics with Levi, for hassle and costs.
That's a quite a bit different that USPS where riders were offered code colored lunch bags. And where the #1 rider demanded to be led up the mountain higher than anyone ever had a Tour winner.
Perhaps Floyd may have felt concerned for his helpers, asking them whether they had their program covered, or needed some help from him with that.

What strikes me as interesting, is that apparently Floyd managed to win one on a pretty basic self-run program with a weak team, whereas Lance would have Ferrari on speed dial, and AOL or whatever. And, rumored to even have a personal drug such as HemAssist to get an edge even over equally talented and trained team mates. Seems that Floyd, although getting realistically not more than 2 or 3 wins had he been protected by the UCI, still must have been a hugely talented rider.

Landis had more GT talent than Armstrong. Simples. Armstrong showed his GT credentials before '98

 

[MarkvW]

Landis had more GT talent than Armstrong. Simples. Armstrong showed his GT credentials before '98

Some guy harvesting rice in Thailand right now has more GT talent than Armstrong ever did. So what? What does that have to do with the kind of team leader that Armstrong and Landis were?

 

[Benotti69]

<snip> Floyd managed to win one on a pretty basic self-run program with a weak team, whereas Lance would have Ferrari on speed dial<snip>

Some guy harvesting rice in Thailand right now has more GT talent than Armstrong ever did. So what? What does that have to do with the kind of team leader that Armstrong and Landis were?

My response was to the above quotation. But you know that

Dont know much about the GT talents of Thailand's rice farmers but a certain ex American Mennonite did not show the kind of leadership qualities that an ex doped Texas junior triathlete showed.

I have not read any anecdotal evidence that any other modern TdF winner had the same leadership qualities as Armstrong but no doubt a livewrong/pubic stratalies employee can make it up. Maybe you need to go back to Hinault who was a strong willed 'patron' in the peloton.

 

[9000ft]

Gosh, there are so many experts posting here, with so much accurate inside information! Why on earth aren't they all in charge of cleaning up cycling and pro sports? They'd stop all those filthy cheaters in their tracks and throw that horrible Lance Armstrong in jail where he belongs!

 

[usedtobefast]

Some guy harvesting rice in Thailand right now has more GT talent than Armstrong ever did. So what? What does that have to do with the kind of team leader that Armstrong and Landis were?

so you raced against Lance?

 

[uberbiker]

Sandy Casar finished 24th in 2005 and he might be the legitimate winner considering the list of riders and teams ahead of him

Sandy finished in 29th, Cadel was 8th maybe he was the winner??

 

[perico]

Landis had more GT talent than Armstrong. Simples. Armstrong showed his GT credentials before '98

I think people sell Armstrong's GT capabilities short. We really don't know what kind of GT rider Armstrong was prior to cancer because he only finished one Tour in 1995, and was still only 23 or 24 years old. He was pulled out by his team in 1993, and was a DNF in 1994. 1996 was supposedly the year he was supposed to take that next step, but by that point, he already was sick. Even David Walsh wrote in 1993 that Armstrong had the talent to one day be a GT winner.

I'm not an LA defender, but no one knows how good he would've been without peds.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I think people sell Armstrong's GT capabilities short. We really don't know what kind of GT rider Armstrong was prior to cancer because he only finished one Tour in 1995, and was still only 23 or 24 years old. He was pulled out by his team in 1993, and was a DNF in 1994. 1996 was supposedly the year he was supposed to take that next step, but by that point, he already was sick. Even David Walsh wrote in 1993 that Armstrong had the talent to one day be a GT winner.

I'm not an LA defender, but no one knows how good he would've been without peds.

No, Walsh never said he had the talent to be a GT winner.
In fact in that book Armstrong admits he does not have what it takes to win the Tour.

Indeed LA was pulled out of that Tour in a pre-arranged move.
If LA had such talent surely he would have been a lot more competitive in the mountain stages knowing he 'only' had to ride 2 mountain stages. Check his finishing times for those stages.

 

[VeloCity]

Gosh, there are so many experts posting here, with so much accurate inside information! Why on earth aren't they all in charge of cleaning up cycling and pro sports? They'd stop all those filthy cheaters in their tracks and throw that horrible Lance Armstrong in jail where he belongs!

Apparently you're having a little trouble grasping the concept of public internet forums.

 

[perico]

No, Walsh never said he had the talent to be a GT winner.
In fact in that book Armstrong admits he does not have what it takes to win the Tour.

Indeed LA was pulled out of that Tour in a pre-arranged move.
If LA had such talent surely he would have been a lot more competitive in the mountain stages knowing he 'only' had to ride 2 mountain stages. Check his finishing times for those stages.

Excuse me, I'm going on memory, but the exact quote from Walsh was along the lines of "Armstrong is not yet ready to compete for overall victory," and the full quotation implied that he one day may.

Point #2: He was a 21 year old kid who had never ridden in a major tour before, and didn't have the experience of coming up through a system from the time he was 13.

I'm not defending LA, and am not going to be backed into a corner or do so, but he was there at the 93 Tour to learn what it took to ride the race. He was an immature (in a sporting sense) kid who hated riding in a bunch, and would waste energy attacking at stupid points in the race. He wasn't mentally ready to compete at that high of a level. The guy didn't yet know how to ride a professional bike race, but his brashness and stubborness would occasionally pay off in a big way.

I don't think for one minute that a clean Armstrong would've won seven tours, but that doesn't mean he would never have matured into a Top 10, or maybe Top 5 contender by the time he reached his mid to late 20s.

All of this is besides the point because of what followed, but the guy had some talent.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Excuse me, I'm going on memory, but the exact quote from Walsh was along the lines of "Armstrong is not yet ready to compete for overall victory," and the full quotation implied that he one day may.

Point #2: He was a 21 year old kid who had never ridden in a major tour before, and didn't have the experience of coming up through a system from the time he was 13.

I'm not defending LA, and am not going to be backed into a corner or do so, but he was there at the 93 Tour to learn what it took to ride the race. He was an immature (in a sporting sense) kid who hated riding in a bunch, and would waste energy attacking at stupid points in the race. He wasn't mentally ready to compete at that high of a level. The guy didn't yet know how to ride a professional bike race, but his brashness and stubborness would occasionally pay off in a big way.

I don't think for one minute that a clean Armstrong would've won seven tours, but that doesn't mean he would never have matured into a Top 10, or maybe Top 5 contender by the time he reached his mid to late 20s.

All of this is besides the point because of what followed, but the guy had some talent.

You are the one who backed yourself in to the corner saying "even David Walsh wrote in 1993 that Armstrong had the talent to one day be a GT winner" - now its "may" be a future GT winner.

Here is what Walsh had to say recently about that '93 interview:

I picked Lance as the guy I'd like to interview. Didn't know him from Adam, knew he was a young talented American cyclist who was expected to do well in the sport, not necessarily the Tour de France, but to do well in the sport.

No-one has suggested that LA did not have 'some talent', just not as a GT contender.

 

[perico]

You are the one who backed yourself in to the corner saying "even David Walsh wrote in 1993 that Armstrong had the talent to one day be a GT winner" - now its "may" be a future GT winner.

Here is what Walsh had to say recently about that '93 interview:


No-one has suggested that LA did not have 'some talent', just not as a GT contender.

Since I'm at work, I can't go digging through the books, and don't see the point of sitting here and arguing over specifics in the book. No, I'm not trying to be an apologist, but I think sometimes things are taken to far.

Maybe he was quoting Merckx, I don't exactly remember since it's been 7 years or so since I last read it, but that still doesn't prove that just because Armstrong didn't do that well before he was 24 years old that he would never be a contender. JVDB finished 74th in his first GT, and 7th in his second. What does that tell me? Absolutely nothing. Armstrong finished 1 Tour precancer, and though he wasn't competing GC, he rode admirably, even better than I thought he was capable of at the time.

There's a huge difference between developing into a legitimate GC rider and demolishing the Tour competition. Personally, I think it's not to big of a stretch that he could've been competitive at the Tour on GC. He was a good rider. It's like saying Indurain (who we know probably dabbled in the sauce as well) was never going to be a GT winner because of his 1986-87 Tour results. The guy was going to be good.

And now looking at your interview you posted, you didn't post the exact quote from the book either. I'm in the process of moving, but when I get unpacked, I'll post where he said it exactly in the book that "Armstrong wasn't going to contend for victory in the TdF this year," but added the "he isn't ready to contend yet."

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Since I'm at work, I can't go digging through the books, and don't see the point of sitting here and arguing over specifics in the book. No, I'm not trying to be an apologist, but I think sometimes things are taken to far.

Sorry, but you are the one who has taken it "too far".

No-one denies LA's talent, but it was obvious that he would not be a GT contender.

Maybe he was quoting Merckx, I don't exactly remember since it's been 7 years or so since I last read it, but that still doesn't prove that just because Armstrong didn't do that well before he was 24 years old that he would never be a contender. JVDB finished 74th in his first GT, and 7th in his second. What does that tell me? Absolutely nothing. Armstrong finished 1 Tour precancer, and though he wasn't competing GC, he rode admirably, even better than I thought he was capable of at the time.

He finished one Tour pre-cancer, one of 4 he started - what does that tell us, quite a lot actually.

There's a huge difference between developing into a legitimate GC rider and demolishing the Tour competition. Personally, I think it's not to big of a stretch that he could've been competitive at the Tour on GC. He was a good rider. It's like saying Indurain (who we know probably dabbled in the sauce as well) was never going to be a GT winner because of his 1986-87 Tour results. The guy was going to be good.

LA was a very good one day or short stage rider with medium difficulty - he hadn't the consistency to be competitive throughout a 3 week GT.

As for Indurain he was also riding the Vuelta before the Tour, which showed his potential.

And now looking at your interview you posted, you didn't post the exact quote from the book either. I'm in the process of moving, but when I get unpacked, I'll post where he said it exactly in the book that "Armstrong wasn't going to contend for victory in the TdF this year," but added the "he isn't ready to contend yet."

The book is not online, but even if it was I cannot quote a comment that does exist.

 

[Bag_O_Wallet]

<snip>
There's a huge difference between developing into a legitimate GC rider and demolishing the Tour competition. Personally, I think it's not to big of a stretch that he could've been competitive at the Tour on GC. He was a good rider. It's like saying Indurain (who we know probably dabbled in the sauce as well) was never going to be a GT winner because of his 1986-87 Tour results. The guy was going to be good.
<snip>

Hmm, within a minute of Roche in the final TT of 1987 Tour.


1987-07-24 Stage 24 - Dijon - Dijon, 38 km (Time Trial)
1 Jean François Bernard (Toshiba - Look) FRA 48' 17
2 Stephen Roche (Carrera Jeans - Vagabond) IRL + 01' 44
3 Marino Lejarreta Arrizabalaga (Seat - Orbea - Caja Rural) SPA + 02' 28 4 Jesper Skibby (Roland - Skala - TW - Chiori - Colnago) DEN + 02' 30
5 Raúl Alcalá Gallegos (7 Eleven) MEX + 02' 33
6 Miguel Indurain (Reynolds - Seur) SPA + 02' 35
7 Pedro Delgado Robledo (Pdm - Ultima - Concorde) SPA + 02' 45
8 Charly Mottet (Systeme U) FRA + 02' 51
9 Peter Stevenhaagen (Pdm - Ultima - Concorde) NED + 02' 55
10 Erik Breukink (Panasonic - Merckx - Agu) NED + 02' 58

http://www.the-sports.org/cycling-tour-de-france-1987-results-men-s2-c0-b0-g21-t94-u40-v1.html

 

[pmcg76]

Since I'm at work, I can't go digging through the books, and don't see the point of sitting here and arguing over specifics in the book. No, I'm not trying to be an apologist, but I think sometimes things are taken to far.

Maybe he was quoting Merckx, I don't exactly remember since it's been 7 years or so since I last read it, but that still doesn't prove that just because Armstrong didn't do that well before he was 24 years old that he would never be a contender. JVDB finished 74th in his first GT, and 7th in his second. What does that tell me? Absolutely nothing. Armstrong finished 1 Tour precancer, and though he wasn't competing GC, he rode admirably, even better than I thought he was capable of at the time.

There's a huge difference between developing into a legitimate GC rider and demolishing the Tour competition. Personally, I think it's not to big of a stretch that he could've been competitive at the Tour on GC. He was a good rider. It's like saying Indurain (who we know probably dabbled in the sauce as well) was never going to be a GT winner because of his 1986-87 Tour results. The guy was going to be good.

And now looking at your interview you posted, you didn't post the exact quote from the book either. I'm in the process of moving, but when I get unpacked, I'll post where he said it exactly in the book that "Armstrong wasn't going to contend for victory in the TdF this year," but added the "he isn't ready to contend yet."

I had a quick read through the book for your quote but found nothing like you suggested however I did find this from Walsh on Lance. "Not a LeMond, maybe not a rider rounded enough to win a Tour but still a rising star".

Also, interesting that Motorola director Hennie Kuiper compared Lance to....Jan Raas!!! Hardly a ringing endorsement of a 7 time future Tour winner.

Lance himself also suggested he was no more physically talented that many others but it was his drive that made him successful.

I actually agree with you that Lance is given less credit as a GT rider than he deserves but it was Lance himself who discounted himself as a Tour winner. He felt he didnt have all the necessay pieces to be a winner. That was in an early 96 interview with Winning Magazine.

 

[autologous]

Of course young Lance had the talent to be a GT champion.

Especially when they changed the rules to include a caged wrestling match halfway up each mountain stage.

 

[Hugh Januss]

What was this thread about, again?

 

[classicomano]

Of course young Lance had the talent to be a GT champion.

Especially when they changed the rules to include a caged wrestling match halfway up each mountain stage.

Jesus, this cant be real. What a joke.

 

[VeloCity]

No-one denies LA's talent, but it was obvious that he would not be a GT contender.

LA was a very good one day or short stage rider with medium difficulty - he hadn't the consistency to be competitive throughout a 3 week GT.

But to play devil's advocate, while it's uncommon, it's not unique. One could say the same about Laurent Jalabert - there weren't too many who would've predicted that he'd transform from a sprinter/classics rider to a GC rider/Vuelta winner, or one day be finishing 4th on GC and winning the mountains classification in the Tour. He never really showed any sign of being a potential GC rider early on in his career.

Not the same as winning 7 Tours, granted, but a similar trajectory.

 

[hrotha]

But to play devil's advocate, while it's uncommon, it's not unique. One could say the same about Laurent Jalabert - there weren't too many who would've predicted that he'd transform from a sprinter/classics rider to a GC rider/Vuelta winner, or one day be finishing 4th on GC and winning the mountains classification in the Tour. He never really showed any sign of being a potential GC rider early on in his career.

Not the same as winning 7 Tours, granted, but a similar trajectory.

The general opinion here seems to be that Jalabert was about as credible as Armstrong. Still, while he did a good GC at one Tour, one Vuelta (which he won) and one Giro, he usually failed in the high mountains, and he remained strongest in the classics and one-week stage races, which had always been his forte, sprints aside.

The way he became a world class time-trialist later on was completely ridiculous, though.