2003 Tour de France stage 15 question

[Dumbass]

I watched a DVD the 2003 Tour yesterday.

After Lance's crash, he got back on and then seemed to have his foot
slip off his pedal. I looked like a rookie blunder, but I read this
morning that it was a gear slip and that he rode to win the stage on a
broken bike.

Does anyone know the condition of his bike after the stage? Is there a
good commentary or Lance interview on the last 10 km of this stage.

PS: If you have never seen it, the last 10 km of stage 15 of the 2003
Tour has to be one of the best ever cycling race senarios. The
biggest GC lead in the the whole 2003 Tour was about 2 minutes and most
of it (including the whole last half) was under 1.5 minutes. It was a
noble duel between Lance and Ullrich.

 

[Dan Connelly]

Dumbass wrote:
> I watched a DVD the 2003 Tour yesterday.
>
> After Lance's crash, he got back on and then seemed to have his foot
> slip off his pedal. I looked like a rookie blunder, but I read this
> morning that it was a gear slip and that he rode to win the stage on a
> broken bike.
>
> Does anyone know the condition of his bike after the stage? Is there a
> good commentary or Lance interview on the last 10 km of this stage.

A broken chainstay. This was discussed on this list at the time.
For example:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group...read/thread/c61c69face173e87/9d3ebf00de6e74f7

Since it reflected on Trek frame reliability, it was not freely
discussed by USPS.

Dan

 

[Dumbass]

Dan Connelly wrote:
> Dumbass wrote:
> > I watched a DVD the 2003 Tour yesterday.
> >
> > After Lance's crash, he got back on and then seemed to have his foot
> > slip off his pedal. I looked like a rookie blunder, but I read this
> > morning that it was a gear slip and that he rode to win the stage on a
> > broken bike.
> >
> > Does anyone know the condition of his bike after the stage? Is there a
> > good commentary or Lance interview on the last 10 km of this stage.
>
> A broken chainstay. This was discussed on this list at the time.
> For example:
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group...read/thread/c61c69face173e87/9d3ebf00de6e74f7
>
> Since it reflected on Trek frame reliability, it was not freely
> discussed by USPS.

Thanks for the info, now I could find more by adding "chainstay" to my
googling.

Lance did complain about "shifting problems" after the stage, which
caused Shimano to investigate and publicize the cracked driveside
chainstay to Velo:

http://www.velonews.com/tour2003/tech/articles/4647.0.html

>
> Dan

 

[Stu Fleming]

Dumbass wrote:

> PS: If you have never seen it, the last 10 km of stage 15 of the 2003
> Tour has to be one of the best ever cycling race senarios. The
> biggest GC lead in the the whole 2003 Tour was about 2 minutes and most
> of it (including the whole last half) was under 1.5 minutes. It was a
> noble duel between Lance and Ullrich.
>

Thanks for the heads-up.
Do you think Ullrich waited for Armstrong on the climb?

 

[Dumbass]

Stu Fleming wrote:
> Dumbass wrote:
>
> > PS: If you have never seen it, the last 10 km of stage 15 of the 2003
> > Tour has to be one of the best ever cycling race senarios. The
> > biggest GC lead in the the whole 2003 Tour was about 2 minutes and most
> > of it (including the whole last half) was under 1.5 minutes. It was a
> > noble duel between Lance and Ullrich.
> >
>
> Thanks for the heads-up.
> Do you think Ullrich waited for Armstrong on the climb?

Yes. I watched the CD of the OLN coverage (I guess it was on OLN
then). That's what they reported, and it looked clear that the group
including Ullrich slowed an kept looking back till Lance rejoined them.
Also, I seem to recall that both Ullrich and Armstong talked about it
in the post-stage interviews. Lance had stopped for Ullrich two years
earlier after Ullrich had a crash.

Lance was lucky to be with the Ullrich group at the time of his crash.
A bit earlier, Ullrich was in a break and might not have felt an
obligation to let Lance catch up.

I wonder how they knew about the crash, since I am pretty sure Ullrich
would not have seen it with Lance behind him. Maybe he heard it on
his helmet radio from someone watching the TV coverage. Or maybe word
was passed on in the group.

It's was amazing to see a Tour de France so close day after day that
the smallest breakaway or placing bonus among the two leaders was
important.

The last time trial the day before Paris loomed as a chance for
Ullrich, but it was really anti-climatic because it rained the race
conditions were awful for any kind of big effort by Ullrich to pick up
a minute. In fact, Ullrich fell and Lance, riding cautiously, picked a
few seconds.

 

[Mike Jacoubowsky]

>> Does anyone know the condition of his bike after the stage? Is there a
>> good commentary or Lance interview on the last 10 km of this stage.
>
> A broken chainstay. This was discussed on this list at the time.
> For example:
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group...read/thread/c61c69face173e87/9d3ebf00de6e74f7
>
> Since it reflected on Trek frame reliability, it was not freely
> discussed by USPS.

The engineers at Trek were actually quite willing to talk about it. From
their perspective, it was very impressive that a single chainstay could
carry the 700 watt load that Lance was putting out at times. As for
reliability in general, it's not generally assumed that a bike should be
able to have the chainstay ridden over by someone after it's been crashed.

For what it's worth, that exact bike is the one Trek chose to display on
their wall of TdF-winning Treks (one from each of Lance's wins) for that
year. Cracked chainstay & all. On the opposite wall, they have a display of
the bikes LeMond won his three tours on.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

"Dan Connelly" <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@i_e_e_e.o_r_g> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dumbass wrote:
>> I watched a DVD the 2003 Tour yesterday.
>>
>> After Lance's crash, he got back on and then seemed to have his foot
>> slip off his pedal. I looked like a rookie blunder, but I read this
>> morning that it was a gear slip and that he rode to win the stage on a
>> broken bike.
>>
>> Does anyone know the condition of his bike after the stage? Is there a
>> good commentary or Lance interview on the last 10 km of this stage.
>
> A broken chainstay. This was discussed on this list at the time.
> For example:
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group...read/thread/c61c69face173e87/9d3ebf00de6e74f7
>
> Since it reflected on Trek frame reliability, it was not freely
> discussed by USPS.
>
> Dan

 

[Tony Rall]

Dumbass wrote:
> Lance was lucky to be with the Ullrich group at the time of his crash.
> A bit earlier, Ullrich was in a break and might not have felt an
> obligation to let Lance catch up.
>
> I wonder how they knew about the crash, since I am pretty sure Ullrich
> would not have seen it with Lance behind him. Maybe he heard it on
> his helmet radio from someone watching the TV coverage. Or maybe word
> was passed on in the group.

Watch it again. At the time of Lance's crash, Mayo was right on his
wheel and crashed on top of him, and Ullrich was a just behind Mayo
and just barely avoided both of them.

--
Tony Rall

 

[Dan Connelly]

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>>> Does anyone know the condition of his bike after the stage? Is there a
>>> good commentary or Lance interview on the last 10 km of this stage.
>> A broken chainstay. This was discussed on this list at the time.
>> For example:
>> http://groups-beta.google.com/group...read/thread/c61c69face173e87/9d3ebf00de6e74f7
>>
>> Since it reflected on Trek frame reliability, it was not freely
>> discussed by USPS.
>
> The engineers at Trek were actually quite willing to talk about it.

After it leaked out. Explaining that your stuff works after it's broken implies
that it breaks.

Dan

 

[Dumbass]

Dan Connelly wrote:
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> >>> Does anyone know the condition of his bike after the stage? Is there a
> >>> good commentary or Lance interview on the last 10 km of this stage.
> >> A broken chainstay. This was discussed on this list at the time.
> >> For example:
> >> http://groups-beta.google.com/group...read/thread/c61c69face173e87/9d3ebf00de6e74f7
> >>
> >> Since it reflected on Trek frame reliability, it was not freely
> >> discussed by USPS.
> >
> > The engineers at Trek were actually quite willing to talk about it.
>
> After it leaked out. Explaining that your stuff works after it's broken implies
> that it breaks.
>
> Dan

I don't think this crash failure indicates a reliability problem unless
it should have been designed to take that kind of crash. It must have
been optimized for climbing efficiency and it may have had a direct hit
from Mayo's frame while under stress from Armstong's crashing.

 

[[email protected]]

Dumbass wrote:
> I don't think this crash failure indicates a reliability problem unless
> it should have been designed to take that kind of crash.

I'd think it would be more the number of warranteed Trek farbon frames
that would indicate a reliability problem.

I know of at least a couple of "multiples", and I don't even get out
all that much.

Somehow, the brand loyalty remains, and is even increased. Or so it
seems. Of course, free "upgrades" helps that cause.

It's OK. Retail Released Beta Testing is widely accepted in this
society ("Microsoft", any) and hey, all the early Kestrels broke, too!
--D-y

 

[Mike Jacoubowsky]

>> The engineers at Trek were actually quite willing to talk about it.
>
> After it leaked out. Explaining that your stuff works after it's broken
> implies
> that it breaks.

Pretty fast leak. I was talking with Christine Anderson (Eurosport
commentator) that evening in Lourdes. She knew about it immediately after
the stage.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


"Dan Connelly" <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@i_e_e_e.o_r_g> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>>>> Does anyone know the condition of his bike after the stage? Is there a
>>>> good commentary or Lance interview on the last 10 km of this stage.
>>> A broken chainstay. This was discussed on this list at the time.
>>> For example:
>>> http://groups-beta.google.com/group...read/thread/c61c69face173e87/9d3ebf00de6e74f7
>>>
>>> Since it reflected on Trek frame reliability, it was not freely
>>> discussed by USPS.
>>
>> The engineers at Trek were actually quite willing to talk about it.
>
> After it leaked out. Explaining that your stuff works after it's broken
> implies
> that it breaks.
>
> Dan

 

[Dumbass]

Stu Fleming wrote:
> Dumbass wrote:
>
> > PS: If you have never seen it, the last 10 km of stage 15 of the 2003
> > Tour has to be one of the best ever cycling race senarios. The
> > biggest GC lead in the the whole 2003 Tour was about 2 minutes and most
> > of it (including the whole last half) was under 1.5 minutes. It was a
> > noble duel between Lance and Ullrich.
> >
>
> Thanks for the heads-up.
> Do you think Ullrich waited for Armstrong on the climb?

"For some time, whether Jan Ullrich waited for Armstrong to remount was
subject of intense debate, although Ullrich himself asserted that he
did indeed wait and did not attack. In a recent interview Armstrong
admitted that Ullrich did wait for him, and that Armstrong himself had
been misled at the time by Tyler Hamilton's gesture and assertion that
Ullrich had not waited."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Ullrich

I guess this means that Armstrong thought that Ullrich did not wait the
day of the race. That might have added to Armstrong's adrenaline
boost and agression in winning the stage.

 

[Donald Munro]

Dumbass wrote:
> I guess this means that Armstrong thought that Ullrich did not wait the
> day of the race. That might have added to Armstrong's adrenaline
> boost

Ah, the adrenaline theory resuscitated.

 

[SLAVE of THE STATE]

Dan Connelly wrote:
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> >>> Does anyone know the condition of his bike after the stage? Is there a
> >>> good commentary or Lance interview on the last 10 km of this stage.
> >> A broken chainstay. This was discussed on this list at the time.
> >> For example:
> >> http://groups-beta.google.com/group...read/thread/c61c69face173e87/9d3ebf00de6e74f7
> >>
> >> Since it reflected on Trek frame reliability, it was not freely
> >> discussed by USPS.
> >
> > The engineers at Trek were actually quite willing to talk about it.
>
> After it leaked out. Explaining that your stuff works after it's broken implies
> that it breaks.

What bicycles don't/won't/can't break in a crash?

 

[Dumbass]

Donald Munro wrote:
> Dumbass wrote:
> > I guess this means that Armstrong thought that Ullrich did not wait the
> > day of the race. That might have added to Armstrong's adrenaline
> > boost
>
> Ah, the adrenaline theory resuscitated.

"According to Armstrong, his fall gave him such an adrenaline boost
that he could attack."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Ullrich

But, the OLN announcers said that sometimes people bonk if the go off
on an adrenaline-fueled break. So, if it was adrenaline, it was not
only adrenaline.

Anyway, it seemed almost unsportmanlike for Armstrong to take off like
that after Ullrich had slowed till he caught up to the group. But I
guess Hamilton had told him that Ullrich had not waited.

BTW what was Hamilton's gesture? Did he shoot Ullrich the bird?

Interesting article on cycling ethics:

http://www.csudh.edu/dearhabermas/tourdefrbk02.htm

 

[Dan Connelly]

Dumbass wrote:
> Dan Connelly wrote:

>> After it leaked out. Explaining that your stuff works after it's broken implies
>> that it breaks.
>>
>> Dan
>
> I don't think this crash failure indicates a reliability problem unless
> it should have been designed to take that kind of crash. It must have
> been optimized for climbing efficiency and it may have had a direct hit
> from Mayo's frame while under stress from Armstong's crashing.
>


Sure, there's no problem with stuff breaking in a crash, but this is marketing,
and Armstrong an Postal were to a large degree professional Trek marketing agents.

Dan

 

[Dan Connelly]

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>>> The engineers at Trek were actually quite willing to talk about it.
>> After it leaked out. Explaining that your stuff works after it's broken
>> implies
>> that it breaks.
>
> Pretty fast leak. I was talking with Christine Anderson (Eurosport
> commentator) that evening in Lourdes. She knew about it immediately after
> the stage.

Well, I'm going on my recollection, which is immediately post-stage, USPS
wasn't talking about it.

Nice photo in the VeloNews photo contest, BTW!

Dan

 

[SLAVE of THE STATE]

Dan Connelly wrote:
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> >>> The engineers at Trek were actually quite willing to talk about it.
> >> After it leaked out. Explaining that your stuff works after it's broken
> >> implies
> >> that it breaks.
> >
> > Pretty fast leak. I was talking with Christine Anderson (Eurosport
> > commentator) that evening in Lourdes. She knew about it immediately after
> > the stage.
>
> ...USPS
> wasn't talking about it.

So?

 

[tony]

Dumbass schrieb:

> Donald Munro wrote:
> > Dumbass wrote:
> > > I guess this means that Armstrong thought that Ullrich did not wait the
> > > day of the race. That might have added to Armstrong's adrenaline
> > > boost
> >
> > Ah, the adrenaline theory resuscitated.
>
> "According to Armstrong, his fall gave him such an adrenaline boost
> that he could attack."
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Ullrich
>
> But, the OLN announcers said that sometimes people bonk if the go off
> on an adrenaline-fueled break. So, if it was adrenaline, it was not
> only adrenaline.
>
> Anyway, it seemed almost unsportmanlike for Armstrong to take off like
> that after Ullrich had slowed till he caught up to the group. But I
> guess Hamilton had told him that Ullrich had not waited.
>
> BTW what was Hamilton's gesture? Did he shoot Ullrich the bird?
>
> Interesting article on cycling ethics:
>
> http://www.csudh.edu/dearhabermas/tourdefrbk02.htm

"That happened in 1998, said Frankie Andreu, a former teammate of
Armstrong's in the U.S. Postal Service group and now a television
commentator.

Andreu recalled that Sean Yates, a talented Irish rider, was allowed to
ride ahead to his hometown when the Tour began in Ireland. "Sean saw
his parents, was cheered by his friends, had a glass of Champagne and
then rejoined the peloton [the lead pack] when it got to his town,"
Andreu said. "

I'm betting Yorkshireman Yates would be surprised to see himself
described as an Irishman!

 

[tony]

tony schrieb:

> Dumbass schrieb:
>
> > Donald Munro wrote:
> > > Dumbass wrote:
> > > > I guess this means that Armstrong thought that Ullrich did not wait the
> > > > day of the race. That might have added to Armstrong's adrenaline
> > > > boost
> > >
> > > Ah, the adrenaline theory resuscitated.
> >
> > "According to Armstrong, his fall gave him such an adrenaline boost
> > that he could attack."
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Ullrich
> >
> > But, the OLN announcers said that sometimes people bonk if the go off
> > on an adrenaline-fueled break. So, if it was adrenaline, it was not
> > only adrenaline.
> >
> > Anyway, it seemed almost unsportmanlike for Armstrong to take off like
> > that after Ullrich had slowed till he caught up to the group. But I
> > guess Hamilton had told him that Ullrich had not waited.
> >
> > BTW what was Hamilton's gesture? Did he shoot Ullrich the bird?
> >
> > Interesting article on cycling ethics:
> >
> > http://www.csudh.edu/dearhabermas/tourdefrbk02.htm
>
> "That happened in 1998, said Frankie Andreu, a former teammate of
> Armstrong's in the U.S. Postal Service group and now a television
> commentator.
>
> Andreu recalled that Sean Yates, a talented Irish rider, was allowed to
> ride ahead to his hometown when the Tour began in Ireland. "Sean saw
> his parents, was cheered by his friends, had a glass of Champagne and
> then rejoined the peloton [the lead pack] when it got to his town,"
> Andreu said. "
>
> I'm betting Yorkshireman Yates would be surprised to see himself
> described as an Irishman!

On second thought, I'm thinking maybe he's from Surrey- East Grinstead?