Lance ****** at Evans???

[mitosis]

He felt good and sprinted for the line. I've been in many races where there are sprints for 110th and 111th place, its what cyclist do.

In this case it did Armstrong, and everyone else in the group no harm and in some way Evans was making a statement that he is not overwhelmed by Armstrong's presence.

Perhaps Armstrong was being a little testy or maybe he considers Evans a threat.

 

[mitosis]

That's the biggest load of **** I've ever read! Evans had every right to do what he did. Hincapie sat on for 200km and Armstrong had nothing to say about that.
Ten years ago Johan Bruyneel sat on Miguel Indurain for 50km and outsprinted him for a stage win. He never went to the front once and now we all know who's team he manages. Armstrong's attitude was hypocritical
When he asked Evans 'what was that for?" Cadel should have replied 'No gifts!". Ha ha.

Here. Here.

 

[Eldrack]

I guess CE was trying to get more time on Vino by sprinting for the line. However he left it too late to make sprinting worth bothering about so when he did sprint it must have looked like he was trying to get one over on the group he was with which LA percieved as an infraction of some sort. I think CE didn't judge the sprint right and LA was over reacting.

 

[DV1976]

In this case it did Armstrong, and everyone else in the group no harm and in some way Evans was making a statement that he is not overwhelmed by Armstrong's presence.

Perhaps Armstrong was being a little testy or maybe he considers Evans a threat.

Well accepting for the sake of the argument that it was a childish thing to do, one would expect an athlete of LA's calibre to pay no attention or to laugh about it... "control freak" and "bully" are words that spring to mind...

 

[mitosis]

Evans gained no time on Vino, etc. as a result of his little sprint. They were too close to the finish. To the contrary, it could be argued Evans would have had the chance to gain more time on Vino, had he cooperated a bit more (or otherwise made efforts) before his last minute little antic.

Fortunately, his move is largely seen for what it is -- childish behavior from somebody who has no chance to podium, and who is lucky he was permitted to stay away on certain prior stages enough to be in the top 10.

I don't know if Evans might have had a grudge against JU for Evans' not having been on the Tour team last year. Perhaps he was trying to -- again childishly -- make sure he finished ahead of JU.

I can't see why you or Armstrong can be offended by Evans move when it did them no harm in the context of the race. In interviews he (Evans) says that he couldn't come around on the climb. It seems that if he could have he would have.

If you are looking for childish you can't go past Armstrong's comment (not the wording but the fact that he felt the need).

 

[mocka58]

It was for 11th place for godssake. Lance is a great champion. He surely shouldn't begrudge the lesser lights a few of the crumbs that fall from the table.

 

[mitosis]

Well accepting for the sake of the argument that it was a childish thing to do, one would expect an athlete of LA's calibre to pay no attention or to laugh about it... "control freak" and "bully" are words that spring to mind...

I don't agree that it was childish - maybe exuberant, he's finished with the big guys why not have a sprint finish.

I do think that Armstrong would have commanded more respect if he had ignored the move and later dismissed it as insignificant considering Evans and Armstrongs relative positions on the GC.

Bully is appropriate.

 

[micron]

I don't agree that it was childish - maybe exuberant, he's finished with the big guys why not have a sprint finish.

I do think that Armstrong would have commanded more respect if he had ignored the move and later dismissed it as insignificant considering Evans and Armstrongs relative positions on the GC.

Bully is appropriate.

yet more proof that - whatever Armstrong might have done for cancer, raising the profile of the sport in the US etc etc - he is a complete and utter w*nker

 

[patch70]

...who is lucky he was permitted to stay away on certain prior stages enough to be in the top 10.

You are hilarious in your delusions. I can't believe you keep coming up with this crapola.

Do you stalk Lance when he is in the same country as you?

 

[musette]

Failing to recognize that people who go on breakways are the ones that people who are key in the peloton allow them to. Why do you think it's always the people who are lowly on GC and/or who have meaningful weaknesses as a GC contender who get away?

 

[rejobako]

My take: It would seem a triviality for Armstrong to concern himself with Evans' little lunge across the line. Evans wasn't going to gain time on the elite group he was coming in with, but it seems fair to suggest that he had the right to up the pace to gain a few seconds on Vino and the others for whom he is fighting for a top 10 GC placing. That being said, I suppose Armstrong probably felt a bit perplexed as to why Evans would decide to showboat like that considering Evans had been content to draft all the way into the finishing stretch.

And although this little incident has become fodder for the anti-Armstrong crowd, Armstrong himself has said nothing publicly about the incident (at least to my knowledge). Evans said Armstrong asked him "what was that for?" and characterized Armstrong as "******" at him. Perhaps, although from what I saw of Armstrong's demeanor after they finished that day, and the fact that he didn't find it necessary to comment on the incident, seems like Evans is the one who has overdramatized Armstrong's reaction (just as Evans overdramatized the finish itself . . . hmmmmmm).

As an aside, there has certainly been a lot of discussion about rider etiquette since Hincapie outfoxed Pereiro last weekend. Seems like every day there's another wrinkle to the issue of when it's OK to "suck wheel" and when it is not. Apparently, since I see that there is a lot of support for Evans latching on to the back of Armstrong's wheel to move up in the top 10 on GC, I will presume that those same people no longer have an issue with Hincapie trying to move into the top 20 by doing the same thing . . .

Or maybe the answer is even simpler than that -- you "wheelsucker" snobs may simply have a rather glorified idea of what riders should be doing in pursuit of a successful finish. In virtually every case, wheelsucking is only frowned upon by the guy who is disadvantaged by the maneuver. The other guy and his supporters will always be able to find a reason to suggest it was permissible.

 

[limerickman]

My take: It would seem a triviality for Armstrong to concern himself with Evans' little lunge across the line. Evans wasn't going to gain time on the elite group he was coming in with, but it seems fair to suggest that he had the right to up the pace to gain a few seconds on Vino and the others for whom he is fighting for a top 10 GC placing. That being said, I suppose Armstrong probably felt a bit perplexed as to why Evans would decide to showboat like that considering Evans had been content to draft all the way into the finishing stretch.

And although this little incident has become fodder for the anti-Armstrong crowd, Armstrong himself has said nothing publicly about the incident (at least to my knowledge). Evans said Armstrong asked him "what was that for?" and characterized Armstrong as "******" at him. Perhaps, although from what I saw of Armstrong's demeanor after they finished that day, and the fact that he didn't find it necessary to comment on the incident, seems like Evans is the one who has overdramatized Armstrong's reaction (just as Evans overdramatized the finish itself . . . hmmmmmm).

As an aside, there has certainly been a lot of discussion about rider etiquette since Hincapie outfoxed Pereiro last weekend. Seems like every day there's another wrinkle to the issue of when it's OK to "suck wheel" and when it is not. Apparently, since I see that there is a lot of support for Evans latching on to the back of Armstrong's wheel to move up in the top 10 on GC, I will presume that those same people no longer have an issue with Hincapie trying to move into the top 20 by doing the same thing . . .

Or maybe the answer is even simpler than that -- you "wheelsucker" snobs may simply have a rather glorified idea of what riders should be doing in pursuit of a successful finish. In virtually every case, wheelsucking is only frowned upon by the guy who is disadvantaged by the maneuver. The other guy and his supporters will always be able to find a reason to suggest it was permissible.

With respect, you're trying to equivocate between what was a "sprint" incident for a very minor place on stage, with a stage win (OP and GH).

I would also dispute the people here are supporting CE : it seems to me that
posters here wonder why LA would say, what CE claimed that he (LA) said.

 

[thebluetrain]

With respect, you're trying to equivocate between what was a "sprint" incident for a very minor place on stage, with a stage win (OP and GH).

I would also dispute the people here are supporting CE : it seems to me that
posters here wonder why LA would say, what CE claimed that he (LA) said.

He equivocated that CE wheelsucked on the LA/Basso group to move up on GC. Why is it ok for CE to wheelsuck to move up on GC and not one accuses or critisizes him of it but GH gets blasted for it on a stage win? Wheelsucking is wheelsucking, right?

 

[limerickman]

He equivocated that CE wheelsucked on the LA/Basso group to move up on GC. Why is it ok for CE to wheelsuck to move up on GC and not one accuses or critisizes him of it but GH gets blasted for it on a stage win? Wheelsucking is wheelsucking, right?

Did you see stage 18 ?
CE worked at the front of the chasing group to the foot of the last climb.
The final 10kms, he didn't go to the front of the LA/Basso/JU group.
At the end of the stage, he pipped LA for a minor placing on the stage.

Compare and contrast that to what Hincapie did last weekend :
GH didn't do any pull whatsoever on the stage.
The only time he came to the front was with 2kms to go to fight for a stage win, wheelsucking against the rider who had ridden at the front for a major part of the day.

 

[mareblu]

When did this ll happen, on yesterday's stage or today's?

 

[roadhog]

This is all sort of ridiculous in my opinion, and if Lance truly was angered by it then he was ridiculous in this situation as well. Who cares!? I was impressed with CE hanging on to the 3 "usual suspects" like he did. He was probably just exhilerated by the company.

Also, I think we should consider that while we have hours and hours to sit around and think strategy and what is proper, the riders themselves decide things in fractions of seconds at times, and after riding for hours in sweltering heat, etc. Consider the final of this stage. CE just crested a serious hill with the best three riders in the Tour. It's a grandstand home stretch on a wide runway of an aerodrome. For two days he has had great success climbing the GC standings. Two close competitors (Vino, Landis) are behind him somewhere. He's going full out towards the line with a company of great riders. He's fired up about the time he's gaining and the company he's with, and perhaps didn't give the "properness" (if there is such a thing) of any other part of the situation a thought.

Now, is it so unreasonable to think he is enthusiastic enough to dig deep and give it all he's got at the end to put an exclamation point on the time he has gained througout the last km's? Come on! We should be happy for this guy, not be-grudging him. It was a great day for him. And LA was in no way threatened by anything that happened.

 

[musette]

Maybe Evans is trying to highlight to people (by linking himself with more newsworthy LA) that he was able to hang with LA and the best on that climb. Maybe it's Evans' attempt to generate free publicity for himself and/or try to frame himself as a better climber than he is. Since Evans knows he himself is not likely to grab many headlines for his non-win, he tried to stir things up and have people write and talk about his having pipped LA.

 

[thebluetrain]

Did you see stage 18 ?
CE worked at the front of the chasing group to the foot of the last climb.
The final 10kms, he didn't go to the front of the LA/Basso/JU group.
At the end of the stage, he pipped LA for a minor placing on the stage.

Compare and contrast that to what Hincapie did last weekend :
GH didn't do any pull whatsoever on the stage.
The only time he came to the front was with 2kms to go to fight for a stage win, wheelsucking against the rider who had ridden at the front for a major part of the day.

Everything GH did before the final climb on his stage win was by the book tactics that no one can dispute. Everything CE did before the last climb on the stage was by the book tactics that no one can dispute. Had GH done a pull before that last climb everyone on this forum would be calling him a moron for doing it. Yes the break had a 17 or 18 min gap on the peleton but at the bottom of the climb the gap if I remember right was around 6:30. So anything before that last climb of GH's stage win and the last climb of CE's move up on GC is irrelevant. The way I see it CE wheelsucked on the final climb of a stage to overtake riders on the GC but no one here jumped him for it like they did GH. And yes I saw the stage.

 

[rejobako]

With respect, you're trying to equivocate between what was a "sprint" incident for a very minor place on stage, with a stage win (OP and GH).

I would also dispute the people here are supporting CE : it seems to me that
posters here wonder why LA would say, what CE claimed that he (LA) said.

I think the question in your second paragraph may be answered by your comments in the first. Armstrong, knowing Evans had been sitting behind him during the entire finishing stretch, was probably wondering what purpose there was in Evans coming 'round to lunge him out at the end for what amounts to a no-bonus no-time-gap consequence. Evans describes Lance as "******", but to my knowledge, the only thing we know that Lance said or did after the stage was to ask Evans "What was that for?"

Seems like a legitimate question, one which Evans answered by saying:

"I can sit on the climb in the headwind, but I can't come 'round. But if you put a finish line in front of me, I have to sprint for it - I'm a bike racer... sorry Lance."
Quizzed on what Armstrong said to him, the Australian replied: "What was that for?"

So what did you say? "I couldn't think of any answer straight away... it's hard after a finish like that!" exclaimed Evans with a smile.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2005/tour05/?id=results/tour0518

(Lest you embark on a context-hunting mission, I will acknowledge now that Evans made other comments in the linked article -- I am only quoting what I believe to be relevant to the point of the discussion.)

From what I can tell, Evans acknowledges that his lunge at the finish was more of an instinctive act than one which had any implications on his GC time, because with respect to the latter criterion, what Evans did made no sense. Which is probably why Armstrong asked him why he did it in the first place. If Armstrong was more than a little annoyed, then I agree he's a bit oversensitive to the incident. But by him simply asking a question, I don't see a reason to embark on the typical Lance-bashing occurring earlier in this thread. (Not by you.)

 

[rejobako]

We should be happy for this guy, not be-grudging him. It was a great day for him. And LA was in no way threatened by anything that happened.

True; my involvement in this thread was not to begrudge Evans, but simply to point out that the only thing anyone knows that Lance did in response to Evans was to ask him "what was that for?" And that question has prompted a multi-page thread with spittle-coated accusations of "bully" and a "control-freak".

Armstrong may be both of those, but I don't think yesterday's developments are evidence of it.