lance armstrong



Beastt

New Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,143
0
0
Originally posted by angrydave
limerickman,

You would be wise to NEVER, EVER bet against a Texan... :)

...(snip)

This "Texas" I keep hearing about; is it a state/part of the United States, or is it some gene with which I'm unfamiliar?

;)
 

angrydave

New Member
Jul 29, 2003
130
0
0
49
Originally posted by Beastt
This "Texas" I keep hearing about; is it a state/part of the United States, or is it some gene with which I'm unfamiliar?

;)

Well,

It's a bit of both. It IS a state, but if you're born here, or in some cases just live here long enough, you get a bit of the blessed soil and air in you. After that, well theres really no limit...

:)
 

Beastt

New Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,143
0
0
Originally posted by angrydave
Well,

It's a bit of both. It IS a state, but if you're born here, or in some cases just live here long enough, you get a bit of the blessed soil and air in you. After that, well theres really no limit...

:)

Perhaps the UCI should start testing for TeXaS. Sounds like an unfair advantage to me.

;)
 

limerickman

Moderator
Jan 5, 2004
16,130
115
63
Originally posted by angrydave
limerickman,

You would be wise to NEVER, EVER bet against a Texan... :)

As far as I can see, at that point, in that race, it was all about mental toughness. Ullrich, one way or the other, let the pressure get to him. Lance seems to thrive on that pressure, and a great many champions are at there best when chaos rules around them. It was a fantastic tour, and when I saw Ullrich fall in the TT, I knew that his body was there for him, but the mind was NOT on focus.

I hope he finishes second again this year. :)

Well, I've decided to ignore your advice : and I've placed a double
bet : two texans will be out of office by the end of 2004.
Bush and Armstrong (got good odds as well 45-1, couldn't resist).
 

angrydave

New Member
Jul 29, 2003
130
0
0
49
Originally posted by limerickman
Well, I've decided to ignore your advice : and I've placed a double
bet : two texans will be out of office by the end of 2004.
Bush and Armstrong (got good odds as well 45-1, couldn't resist).

I think I'd have to agree on Bush, but not on Lance. We have to have hope...

And by the way, that Texans, with a capital
"T"

Dave

:)
 

limerickman

Moderator
Jan 5, 2004
16,130
115
63
Originally posted by angrydave
I think I'd have to agree on Bush, but not on Lance. We have to have hope...

And by the way, that Texans, with a capital
"T"

Dave

:)

Dave,
Sorry no offence meant by typing small t - just bad typing on my behalf !

Genuinely, I got these odds in the bookies (bookmakers) 45-1 !

Just shows you - you can put a bet on anything these days !
 

angrydave

New Member
Jul 29, 2003
130
0
0
49
Originally posted by limerickman
Dave,
Sorry no offence meant by typing small t - just bad typing on my behalf !

Genuinely, I got these odds in the bookies (bookmakers) 45-1 !

Just shows you - you can put a bet on anything these days !

No offense taken. :) All in good fun.

You certainly can put bets on anything, there were bookmakers putting odds on Saddam surviving, number of days to find Bin Laden, etc etc.
 

fuelrider

New Member
Jul 28, 2003
31
0
0
60
For all you wishers and doubters of LA not winning his 6th: What are you, nuts? They had him down last year and he still won. LA is a classic spin doctor and the more press he gets, the more he will lead all to believe he's too old, busy chasing women, eating donuts, drinking beer, not training enough, etc. LA is the best athlete in the world and anyone who thinks different, or measures his success on how many UCI events he enters to win is either hoping for him to lose or, is reading too many articles. LA thrives on the pressure and the only way he loses is if he gets hurt...nobody will outright beat him over 20 days in France. If one beats him in the mountains, they can't hang in a TT, Heras and Tyler included. That's why Ulrich has the best shot, but LA still has a better power to weight ratio and that hurts him in the big steeps. USPS has proven the ability to elimate and compensate for variables. But, all argument aside, the fact is LA and USPS know he is the best and so does everybody that is chasing him. And that is a huge advantage.
 

Fixey

New Member
Mar 9, 2004
635
0
0
This should get me well flammed but oh well :D

Now that Jan has a real team (no offence Bianchi) that can help him, Jan will dominate this years tour. No disrespect to LA intended but I think the rider with the best team won last year, I felt both Vin and Jan where posibly stronger riders individually. Shame Marco has been absent for the past few years for I think that would have been interesting too, we all saw him dominate LA on occations in '01 when he was obviously not fit, '02 and '03 would have been awsome with him there but this year I pick Jan, Vin then LA in that order.....
 

Beastt

New Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,143
0
0
Originally posted by Fixey
This should get me well flammed but oh well :D

Now that Jan has a real team (no offence Bianchi) that can help him, Jan will dominate this years tour. No disrespect to LA intended but I think the rider with the best team won last year, I felt both Vin and Jan where posibly stronger riders individually. Shame Marco has been absent for the past few years for I think that would have been interesting too, we all saw him dominate LA on occations in '01 when he was obviously not fit, '02 and '03 would have been awsome with him there but this year I pick Jan, Vin then LA in that order.....

Interesting picks but it's not too difficult to see where the idea comes from. Ullrich and Vino were amazingly strong in '03. Vino showed that he didn't quite have the form to take it all the way to the end and Ullrich couldn't beat Armstrong in the mountains once Armstrong started to feel better.

I'm trying to remember which team Ullrich was riding with the other two times Armstrong beat him in the Tour... started with a "T", I think. Seems I have a vague recollection that they may have changed their name recently though.

All kidding aside, I realize that the members, and therefore the team strengths, do change over time but I don't see any new members to the old Telekom, (new T-Mobile), team that would suggest to me that the team will be significantly better than it was in prior years. Ullrich does look strong but another way to say that is that Armstrong looked less strong than he had the 4 prior years. Vinokorouv certainly looked stronger last year than I've ever seen before but this may be a double-edge sword for T-Mobile.

I think Pantani learned a bitter lesson in 2000 after issuing a few comments regarding the supposed insignificance of Armstrong's in '99. Sadly, we'll never know if Pantani could have made a better showing against him under different circumstances.

Regardless of who wins it should be a very interesting Tour. One has to wonder if some of the rule changes such as the minimal gains to be had from the TTT, will work for or against Armstrong. I've heard suggestions to support both sides. I think Ullrich has what it takes to be a Tour de France champion after Armstrong has retired. Obviously I'm going with Lance for '04.

:D
 

Fixey

New Member
Mar 9, 2004
635
0
0
LOL, nice Beastt, thought LA learned a leeson or 2 himself in 2000....and I sure would have liked to see em (pantani/Armstrong) go at it in '01 - 02 becouse (no offence to anyone) I think they where not strong years for Ullrich and Beloki doesnt quite have it to win...

I think that all up, no matter who you support, the real winners of the tour this year will be us (OMG that sounds cheesy)
JAN, Vin, Lance et al all fit and going hard how can we loose?
 

limerickman

Moderator
Jan 5, 2004
16,130
115
63
I still think that being the reigning TDF champion must make LA favourite for 2004
TDF.

I can see where Jan Ullrich will be able to mount a very, very serious challenge now that T-Mobile, on paper at least, have the raw material to neutralize the strength of USPS.
Factor in Vino’s performance in 2003 : and one would be confident that T-Mobile could,
could have a chance of getting top place on the GC podium.
As an Ullrich fan, I would dearly love to see him win like he did in 1997 but I know only too well that we cannot be certain of anything when it comes to JU.
If you also factor in the CSC team in to the equation, USPS will undoubtedly have more to concern them than just T-Mobile.
If Hamilton can replicate his form from 03 TDF : this will also have a corrosive effect on USPS.

Can USPS withstand, what I think will be, a more competitive peleton in the 04 TDF ?
Will LA retain his title ?

I think that LA is not the rider that he was between 1999-2002 : but this doesn’t make
him a bad rider !
I think that between his age, the pressure to perform year in, year out – the general wear and tear in trying to stay numero uno, does corrode a cyclists performance.
Over that time period, it is natural that there must be some slippage in his performance.
But, even when he was under severe pressure last year, he still managed to come up with the goods (and I have to say this, and it kills me to say it because I am not an LA-fan,
I thought his 2003 victory was the most worthy of any of his victories – there I’ve said it !).
Throw in the fact that he will be the first rider to win 6 T’sDF, I think he has enough motivation to withstand all of the combined teams and pressures.
His winners mentality is going to be the deciding factor.
The fact that he has beaten Ullrich in three T’sDF, makes it all the more harder for JU to escape the psychological deficit that he has when racing LA in the TDF.
If JU can overcome LA, it would be some achievement.
But my head says LA will win.
 

pineapple

New Member
Oct 3, 2003
213
0
0
Originally posted by limerickman
I still think that being the reigning TDF champion must make LA favourite for 2004
TDF.

I can see where Jan Ullrich will be able to mount a very, very serious challenge now that T-Mobile, on paper at least, have the raw material to neutralize the strength of USPS.
Factor in Vino’s performance in 2003 : and one would be confident that T-Mobile could,
could have a chance of getting top place on the GC podium.
As an Ullrich fan, I would dearly love to see him win like he did in 1997 but I know only too well that we cannot be certain of anything when it comes to JU.
If you also factor in the CSC team in to the equation, USPS will undoubtedly have more to concern them than just T-Mobile.
If Hamilton can replicate his form from 03 TDF : this will also have a corrosive effect on USPS.

T-Mobile will need to get organized and pledge complete support to JU, otherwise the sheer efficiency of the blue train will give LA too much of an advantage. Also, if last year was anything to go by, Hamilton should be entering his best years professionally, so hopefully he will also be up there in GC. He's at Phonak now isn't he? Will they be there for him for 3 weeks?
 

winchaos

New Member
Jan 10, 2004
4
0
0
51
Originally posted by ericthered


In 2004, Ulrich is just better, simple as that. He's younger, stronger, more talented, and has a better team. I used to drink cappucino with Lance in '91-'92 when I first moved to Austin. I always thought he was a great guy even before cancer. But he's old.

In 1999-2001 Lance got stronger every year. In 2001 the only person who could beat Lance wore a cape. 2002-2003 he has gotten progressively weaker every year. Meanwhile Ulrich is set for a career year. He never intended to do that well in the TDF last year. It was '04 he'd had circled on his calendar all along. LOOK OUT!!!

Sorry, but so far Ullrich is seeming far from better than Armstrong. I realize it's still very early in the season, but so far Lance has won a time trial, finished third in the Criterium International, and pretty much been competitive in the races hes been in, while Ullrich is failing to even stay with the peloton. Look at the Setmana-Catalana, Jan lost several minutes every stage, and ended up finishing over 58 minutes back. Early season form may not be an indicator of what will happen at the tour, but so far I don't think Lance needs to worry.

But, we'll see what happens in July.
 

ABogoni

New Member
Apr 5, 2004
22
0
0
35
Lance should win 2004, unless some spectator tries to punch him in the stomach, as was the fat of some other champion. But if you read his biography he doesn’t seem to be losing motivation unlike most cyclists at his level.
 

pace-line

New Member
Apr 6, 2004
57
0
0
Originally posted by msrw
There are a couple of external factors which could dramatically lower Lance's prospects for the Tour:

1. He seems to have finally entered a post cancer survival mode--he's largely returned to the personality he had before cancer, meaning less intense, less focused.

2. He's less hungry. He has little to prove at this point, and tons of other interesting things to be doing. He recently announced that he would rather spend Spring in Texas with his kids then win a sixth Tour. Doesn't sound like the old Lance, does it?

3. He doesn't have his personal support network--he just went through a divorce. Sheryl Crow, his new girlfriend, is definitely NOT the retiring, selfless companion that his wife had always been to him.

4. He's skipping much of his Spring racing schedule in Europe in favor of training in Texas.

All of these things are negatives as far as winning a sixth Tour goes.
I appluad the use of the word could. That having been said, how does location of trianing, and racing have anything to do with exacting preperation? How does the aggressive attack on the last climb in 2003 TDF show less intensity to you, after adversity of a fluke crash and a broken rear chainstay, to put such distance between his closest competitors, and win? Focus, seems to be covered there as well, he just waited later than he might well have to attack. How does a man, post cancer survivor, five time tour winner, in a row, have little to prove at this point? Would winning a sixth tour in a row be anticlimactic? That is, considering no one in history to date has? So at this point in a career, if you were Lance, you would elect to turn and walk away from what has been more than a career, and racing, but a lifestyle and discipline coupled with a passion for winning and beating the odds, to do lots of other interesting things, instead of waiting until retirment from the sport? It is clear to me that you are in no way similar, no could understand a dedicated lifestyle and passion for anything, especially when you suggest that wanting to be with his kids is weakness. That shows a lack of masculinity, strength and priority that would always be damaging. After all, what does any human being strive for, if it has only to do with being alone? The "old Lance", as mentioned, almost lost 2003 TDF, due to lack of aggression, and out of balance priorities. His natural father had nothing to do with his life, and I doubt he would wish that on anyone, and would be ill advised to sire the same conduct with his own kids, despite ammicable divorce with Kik. His new girlfriend, true is no retiring type, but then, neither is Lance, yet. The fact that she is not, and has a balanced perspective in life, could be said to have a possitive effect on his perspective and priorities. Set a name in history, as best cyclist to date, ever, then perhaps retire, or, perhaps burn a trial that would take six, seven, or even eight years to top. Now that would be a bit to prove, would it not? I suppose, perspective does have a bit to do with what is possitive and what is negative, but we all will see in July. I feel that the whispers that Lance could never top the five time winners club of which he is now a part, will drive him wild, until he proves the talk wrong. Perhaps then retirment, but who knows?
 

pace-line

New Member
Apr 6, 2004
57
0
0
Originally posted by winchaos
Sorry, but so far Ullrich is seeming far from better than Armstrong. I realize it's still very early in the season, but so far Lance has won a time trial, finished third in the Criterium International, and pretty much been competitive in the races hes been in, while Ullrich is failing to even stay with the peloton. Look at the Setmana-Catalana, Jan lost several minutes every stage, and ended up finishing over 58 minutes back. Early season form may not be an indicator of what will happen at the tour, but so far I don't think Lance needs to worry.

But, we'll see what happens in July.
If Ulrich is so much better, why, to date, has he been unable to beat post cancer Lance? Younger, may be one advantage, true, but in GC, I would take more experienced and wiser any day. Ulrich is definitely a man to be marked, and has won, and could win, but beating Lance has been a road full of shortcomings, thusfar, for Jan. See you in July:)
 

Fixey

New Member
Mar 9, 2004
635
0
0
Originally posted by pace-line
If Ulrich is so much better, why, to date, has he been unable to beat post cancer Lance?

It has not been Jan vs Lance but Jan vs USPS. Now Jan has an equal team we will see who the better man is...I think Jan but I wouldn't bet more than a couple $$....thats if Team Mobile push Jan btw...if Lance is all over Jan they may send Alex...either can win.
 

Roy Gardiner

New Member
Sep 15, 2003
119
0
0
Originally posted by Beastt
I have to chuckle at all the comments about Ullrich being the man to beat and being better than Armstrong.
Why? It's what Armstrong says - well, the first bit, anyway :)
Originally posted by limerickman Hianult and Merckx won their first TDF at the age of 23. Fignon won his first TDF at 24.
Coppi won his first Giro at 21 years of age. Anquetil won his first TDF at 23. Bartali won his first Giro at 22. Ullrich won his first TDF at 23.
Felice Gimondi also won his first tour at 23; Ullrich was 2nd at 22; Armstrong himself was world champion at 21. Anquetil was amateur champion of France at 18, Grand Prix des Nations winner at 19 (unofficial world TT championship); wasn't Merckx amateur world RR champion at 18 or 19?

It's correct that most of the great champions are great very young.

So in addition Jan being a little better this year and Lance being a little older there is the ever-present possibility of the young, unknown pretender blowing the race apart. Which Ullrich would have done in '96 but for being team-mate of the ultimate winner.

Tyler won't fall off, or Liepheimer, or Beloki.

Cipo' vs Petacchi in the sprints; maybe, just maybe, Cipo getting to Paris, what a sprint that'll be.

It's going to be a mthrfkr boys, roll on the day. :D
 

limerickman

Moderator
Jan 5, 2004
16,130
115
63
Originally posted by Roy Gardiner
Why? It's what Armstrong says - well, the first bit, anyway :) Felice Gimondi also won his first tour at 23; Ullrich was 2nd at 22; Armstrong himself was world champion at 21. Anquetil was amateur champion of France at 18, Grand Prix des Nations winner at 19 (unofficial world TT championship); wasn't Merckx amateur world RR champion at 18 or 19?

It's correct that most of the great champions are great very young.

So in addition Jan being a little better this year and Lance being a little older there is the ever-present possibility of the young, unknown pretender blowing the race apart. Which Ullrich would have done in '96 but for being team-mate of the ultimate winner.

Tyler won't fall off, or Liepheimer, or Beloki.

Cipo' vs Petacchi in the sprints; maybe, just maybe, Cipo getting to Paris, what a sprint that'll be.

It's going to be a mthrfkr boys, roll on the day. :D

No disrespect intended here Roy - but including LA as a champion at 21 in a one day race (the World R/R title) is not the same as the performances of Merckx, Ullrich, Giomondi, Hinault in their stage race debuts.
The super champions all debuted well in the first major stage races.
This current champion - Armstrong - never debuted well in a stage
race.
In fact, he never won a stage race of real merit in his first four years as a professional
This is the reason why I find it extreemely difficult to believe
that LA is a bona fide champion.
He had no pedigree as a stage cyclist, pre-cancer.
His palmares in stage races was no existent.
The other champions are genuine men of authentic ability.
LA ?