A
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Epicycle said:Landis has an 8 man team with three former Pro Tour riders yet they get beat badly by a 3 man team and can't even put anybody in the top 15 on GC. Ouch!
Epicycle said:Landis has an 8 man team with three former Pro Tour riders yet they get beat badly by a 3 man team and can't even put anybody in the top 15 on GC. Ouch!
VeloFidelis said:Hmmm... I'm not sure that Floyd sucks. In fact I'm quite sure that he can kick the asses of all the collective asses who have postulated here, that he does. What?... We get to hold him up to some ridiculous and speculative standard when we can't even hang with the Cat 4's? And I know you know what I'm talking about.
Here's a guy who came up the hard way in the pro peloton. A racer with palmares the rank him as a top Pro GC rider. A guy who, with a dead hip, pulled off the greatest one day TdF stage performance since the Merckx era, and won the Tour with guts and talent. A man who lost millions of dollars, financial security for his family, and a his sporting reputation and good name, when they took it all away.
Here's a guy who despite all advice to the contrary continued to stand by his convictions and fought an exhausting battle to clear his name, when he could simply have done a Basso and saved a fortune. I don't care whether you think Floyd is guilty or not, and most likely neither does he, but you can't explain away why he would fight so hard to prove his innocence. A fight that, by the way cost him his family, his marriage, his dignity, probably his house, and whatever money he had left.
And now that he has returned to cycling which is probably one of the few things he can still muster some emotion for, he has to be subjected to the speculation of the mindless masses who have the temerity to ask why he "Sucks".
Where he finds the energy or desire to even get back on a bike if a mystery to me. But I do know that he, and every other Pro that makes a living racing his bike, no matter how meager, is a better rider than me, and any other person who has expressed an opinion on this matter in this Forum.
No, I don't think Floyd sucks, but I think he has a well earned right to think that we all do!
BikeCentric said:LOL. This is the most entertaining post I've read so far on this forum. Please keep the laughs coming VeloFidelis! I'm trying to decide if this joker is actually Floyd himself, a member of Floyd's entourage, or just a very talented troll.
VeloFidelis said:I would expect this to resonate particularly well with the smug and under underachieving, or anyone with too high an opinion of their opinion. Glad to see it hit it's mark.
VeloFidelis said:I don't care whether you think Floyd is guilty or not, and most likely neither does he, but you can't explain away why he would fight so hard to prove his innocence.!
VeloFidelis said:I would expect this to resonate particularly well with the smug and under underachieving, or anyone with too high an opinion of their opinion. Glad to see it hit it's mark.
Alpe d'Huez said:Thanks for clumping everyone together. Let me guess, you think we're all "Lance haters" too?
I think my posts, and the posts from several others on here, were actually very fair, and reasonable supportive of Floyd's future considering his past.
Did you ever think that just maybe his thinking was that by confessing he'd instantly lose his TDF title? And by fighting it, he maintained the off-chance he would be able to hold on to it? Knowing all along he'd be out of the sport for at least a year anyway because of the hip, and probably blacklisted a lot longer even if USADA or CAS overturned his sanction?
I will agree that his Stage 17 ride into Morzine was something to see. And I don't think it was only doping that did it. He got a little rest the day before when he bonked. And he had a great strategy, chasing down Sinkewitz who acted like a carrot when he attacked. Then Periero, Kloden, Rasmussen and the others couldn't get their act together and chase in time, and could be seen bickering with each other (two of those two names later proven to be doped as well). Floyd also made up time on the descents, as he's good on them, and a solo rider can descend faster than a group. And finally it was in hot weather, which is to his liking, and he stayed well hydrated and drenched himself in water.
None the less, when you see something too good to be true...
I'm sure part of Floyd's bitterness came from the thinking that as far as he likely knew, he wasn't doping much more than anyone else, including probably the rest of his team, his previous team, the aforementioned examples from that Tour, and the guy that won the Giro that year, and the guy that won the Tour de Suisse that year, and the guy that would win the Vuelta that year, and the guy that won the Vuelta the previous year, and the guy leading the Tour and about to win the next year, and the guy...
Alpe d'Huez said:Agree 53x11.
Floyd, and especially his legal team and manager's, behavior during his USADA hearings was inexcusable. If it seemed like I was giving him credit for his legal tenacity, that was the opposite of my intention. Only stating that it's my belief he felt he didn't dope more than anyone else, and was fighting to keep his Tour win that he seized with a brilliant ride.
I left out "the guy that won the previous Tour" from my list, among many others of course.
Alpe d'Huez said:Floyd, and especially his legal team and manager's, behavior during his USADA hearings was inexcusable.
BikeCentric said:You know I even gave Floyd the benefit of the doubt all the way up until the day his minion made the witness-tampering threatening cell phone call to LeMond. From that moment on I wrote Floyd off as a respectable person.
VeloFidelis said:Hmmm... I'm not sure that Floyd sucks. In fact I'm quite sure that he can kick the asses of all the collective asses who have postulated here, that he does. What?... We get to hold him up to some ridiculous and speculative standard when we can't even hang with the Cat 4's? And I know you know what I'm talking about.
Here's a guy who came up the hard way in the pro peloton. A racer with palmares the rank him as a top Pro GC rider. A guy who, with a dead hip, pulled off the greatest one day TdF stage performance since the Merckx era, and won the Tour with guts and talent. A man who lost millions of dollars, financial security for his family, and a his sporting reputation and good name, when they took it all away.
Here's a guy who despite all advice to the contrary continued to stand by his convictions and fought an exhausting battle to clear his name, when he could simply have done a Basso and saved a fortune. I don't care whether you think Floyd is guilty or not, and most likely neither does he, but you can't explain away why he would fight so hard to prove his innocence. A fight that, by the way cost him his family, his marriage, his dignity, probably his house, and whatever money he had left.
And now that he has returned to cycling which is probably one of the few things he can still muster some emotion for, he has to be subjected to the speculation of the mindless masses who have the temerity to ask why he "Sucks".
Where he finds the energy or desire to even get back on a bike if a mystery to me. But I do know that he, and every other Pro that makes a living racing his bike, no matter how meager, is a better rider than me, and any other person who has expressed an opinion on this matter in this Forum.
No, I don't think Floyd sucks, but I think he has a well earned right to think that we all do!
BroDeal said:This is so pathetic is should be posted on Trust But Never Verify, the site that bears a lot of responsibility for encouraging FLandis to destroy himself.
VeloFidelis said:Help me out here BroDeal. In your previous post you pretty much concur with my sentiment completely.
BroDeal said:For whatever reason--I am probably hypocritical--I do not have much of a problem with the way he defended himself, but then Hamilton's defense does not really bother me either. I think it was stupid in many ways, but I find the actual act trying to avoid being the scapegoat for a corrupt system understandable. There was a lot to be gained if his defense succeeded.
I personally think he was used by people around him who filled his head with garbage about taking down the system when they should have been giving practical advice about the possible consequences of such a strategy. Attempting to kill the king and failing never ends well for the potential assassin.
Epicycle said:Beyond the Lemond incident there is the issue of all the money he raised. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were donated in the belief he was telling the truth even if it was technically billed as a "fairness" fund.