Merckx disappointed with Armstrong..........................................

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by Heinz Getzler, Aug 30, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. On 08/31/2003 08:59 AM, in article
    [email protected], "curt" <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Eddy is just trying to make sure Armstrong isn't as big of a name as Merckx, IMHO. I mean the guy
    > had his career and it is over. Armstrong focuses on the TdF, so what? What does that have to do
    > with Merckx? Why does he even comment on someone else?

    Perhaps, because he is a television commentator?

    --
    Steven L. Sheffield stevens at veloworks dot com veloworks at worldnet dot ay tea tee dot net bellum
    pax est libertas servitus est ignoratio vis est ess ay ell tea ell ay kay ee sea aye tee why you ti
    ay aitch aitch tee tea pea colon [for word] slash [four ward] slash double-you double-yew double-ewe
    dot veloworks dot com [four word] slash
     


  2. Robert Chung

    Robert Chung Guest

    Dave wrote:
    > I just thought that in a couple of years, when the link to the article is broken, someone
    > searching Google Groups wouldn't have to wonder what the article read.

    As pointed out elsewhere, cyclingnews.com doesn't break links. However, since you thought this and
    wanted to get that piece into Google's archive in perpetuity, it's even more important to include
    the source attribution.
     
  3. curt wrote:

    > You make good points Tom. I am not going to get into a pissing contest with comparing Merckx to
    > Lance. Lance himself states he isn't the rider Merckx was. I just think people should chill out on
    > the guy. He had cancer. He went through kemo.[sic] His mind is forever changed from that. You
    > never know if the cancer could come back or whatever.

    Writing as another survivor, I found it drove me extremely hard, following my treatment. Busting my
    ass in the saddle on a daily basis was a great way to prevent dwelling on it. Too bad I suffered a
    severely sprained ankle on a tennis court, which slowed me down for a couple years.

    > I would like to see him race more, but at what expense?

    Divorce, maybe?

    > Let they guy race his TdF's and enjoy his rides. I mean 5 straight is pretty impressive regardless
    > on whatever else he does during the course of the year.
    >
    > I think Lance's life story is very inspirational. There are always people trying to put him down
    > for whatever reason. Many people would have given up on coming back after all he went through. He
    > is one strong dude, IMHO.

    He's always been a good athlete, but the primary focus of the TdF has a lot to do with the american
    public having heard of it at some time, possibly when GL won. However, 99+% of the american
    population (OLN moved up in viewers this year, but still shy of 1 million, US population is close to
    300 million) don't even see the race, let alone understand how even a single day race works with
    teams. Do you think Lance would get $4,000,000 to race the classics? Great for those of us who
    follow the races, but bad for sponsorship. How many of your neighbors would guess Paris-Roubaix is a
    night club in Paris or an expensive mineral water?

    > Enjoy, Curt
    >
    > "Tom Paterson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    >
    >>>From: "curt"
    >>
    >>>Eddy is just trying to make sure >Armstrong isn't as big of a name as
    >>
    >>Merckx, IMHO. I mean the guy had his >career and it is over.
    >>
    >>Only the most pro wins, plus multiple Giros, Vuelta, seven M-SR's, etc.
    >
    > And
    >
    >>winning every pro event on the calender except Paris-Tours, and the track wins...
    >>
    >>
    >>>Armstrong focuses on the TdF, so what? What does that have >to do with Merckx?
    >>
    >>My "media" reading is scant but Merckx not only seems to have steered LA
    >
    > toward
    >
    >>GT's but IMS some years ago said he (LA) could win six. "Friend and
    >
    > advisor".
    >
    >>>Why does he even comment on someone else?
    >>
    >>Old, good answer: Merckx is paid, why do you do it?
    >>
    >>
    >>>when he retires it will be huge.
    >>
    >>Assuming you mean his pile of money, rumors are "it" was pretty big before cancer. Certainly a lot
    >>bigger now. --Tom Paterson
    >>
    >
     
  4. --------------000305050400090506020000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

    Robert Chung wrote:

    >Dave wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I just thought that in a couple of years, when the link to the article is broken, someone
    >>searching Google Groups wouldn't have to wonder what the article read.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >As pointed out elsewhere, cyclingnews.com doesn't break links. However, since you thought this and
    >wanted to get that piece into Google's archive in perpetuity, it's even more important to include
    >the source attribution.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    From a self appointed defender of the holy LA....

    Who cares what the original source attrribution is - especially when the original source is second
    or third hand - no morfe than scuttlebutt.

    Get a life - learn to sprint, or ride track....

    --------------000305050400090506020000 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

    <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta
    http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"> <title></title> </head> <body>
    <br> <br> Robert Chung wrote:<br> <blockquote type="cite"
    cite="[email protected]"> <pre wrap="">Dave wrote: </pre> <blockquote
    type="cite"> <pre wrap="">I just thought that in a couple of years, when the link to the article is
    broken, someone searching Google Groups wouldn't have to wonder what the article read. </pre>
    </blockquote> <pre wrap=""><!----> As pointed out elsewhere, cyclingnews.com doesn't break links.
    However, since you thought this and wanted to get that piece into Google's archive in perpetuity,
    it's even more important to include the source attribution.

    </pre> </blockquote> From a self appointed defender of the holy LA....<br> <br> Who cares what
    the original source attrribution is - especially when the original source is second or third hand
    - no morfe than scuttlebutt.<br> <br> Get a life - learn to sprint, or ride track....<br>
    </body> </html>

    --------------000305050400090506020000--
     
  5. Fred Marx

    Fred Marx Guest

    > From a self appointed defender of the holy LA....
    >
    > Who cares what the original source attrribution is - especially when the original source is second
    > or third hand - no morfe than scuttlebutt.

    gee I don't think you can classify one of the top online cycling resources as 2nd or 3rd hand....
     
  6. Fred Marx wrote:
    > gee I don't think you can classify one of the top online cycling resources as 2nd or 3rd hand....

    No matter how you *rate* them, in this case the story was indeed second hand (out of a newspaper,
    wasn't it?). Be that as it may, I agree with Chung that the source should have been mentioned.

    E.
     
  7. Scott Downie

    Scott Downie Guest

    Well I guess that was misspoken. Le Tour is a great show of cycling ability. I am just thinking that
    one race a year does not make a superlative career. It is a narrow band of people able to compete
    for GC in Le Tour. 4 or 5 out of pro cycling. It obvious Merckx was able to race in Le Tour but also
    able to win say Paris Roubaux. Lance does not seem to have this type of cycling ability nor does he
    choose to try. That is what I mean by a narrow show. There is a lot of races out there that someone
    has to win and Le Tour is just one. Lance has perfect physiology for Le Tour. Can he expand that
    ability out of the "narrow show" of Le Tour and bring his talent to other cycling races and win ? I
    wish he would give it a shot.

    --
    Irrationally held truths may be more harmfull than reasoned errors. "curt" <[email protected]>
    wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "Tom Paterson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > >From: "Scott Downie"
    > >
    > > >In my opinion Le Tour is a narrow show of cycling ability. Time for Lance to show how broad his
    > > >cycling abilities are..
    > >
    > > LA was a one-dayer with some hits and near misses (incl. the Ardennais
    > Weekend)
    > > before cancer-- he won San Sebastian, two Tour stages, Worlds RR, Fleche Wallone. He broadened
    > > his cycling abilities when he got lighter
    (improved
    > on
    > > long climbs), learned to TT, and started winning the Tour de France.
    > >
    > > TdF a narrow show? How is an event that requires top-level abilities in
    > ITT,
    > > TTT, climbing, and, at minimum, finishing in the bunch every stage for
    > three
    > > weeks "narrow"? --Tom Paterson
    >
    > Tom, I couldn't put it better myself. The TdF narrow???? That is almost too silly to respond too.
    >
    > Enjoy, Curt
    >
     
  8. Scott Downie wrote:

    > Well I guess that was misspoken. Le Tour is a great show of cycling ability. I am just thinking
    > that one race a year does not make a superlative career.

    If you could pick only one race a year you were going to win, why not pick the Tour, eh?

    > It is a narrow band of people able to compete for GC in Le Tour. 4 or 5 out of pro cycling. It
    > obvious Merckx was able to race in Le Tour but also able to win say Paris Roubaux.

    Merckx wasn't called the 'cannibal' for nothing he took the whole thing, KOM, Points and GC in 1969;
    KoM and GC in '70; Points and GC in '71 & '72. We'll probably never see the like again, as the tour
    is now much more than just GC, with genuine points specialists and those wild and crazy KoM
    contenders who risk flaming out before the finish, just to collect points.

    > Lance does not seem to have this type of cycling ability nor does he choose to try. That is what I
    > mean by a narrow show.

    Yep, and this is probably what it's going to boil down to from now on. Jan and Joseba are GC
    specialists, too. Basso is up and coming and maybe this Pecharroman is the next big thing in GC,
    too. Can you imagine any team trying to sign these guys as Classics riders?

    > There is a lot of races out there that someone has to win and Le Tour is just one.

    It's not just one, however, it's _the one_ and everyone wants to be in it and win a stage, have
    their mum see them on TV, and maybe even finish it, because when you're a tour rider, your a star.
    Even if it's only for 3 weeks.

    > Lance has perfect physiology for Le Tour. Can he expand that ability out of the "narrow show" of
    > Le Tour and bring his talent to other cycling races and win ? I wish he would give it a shot.

    He's got more than the physiology, he's got the smarts, though that dehydration thing was pretty
    bone-head. I'm in disbelief that someone wasn't keeping an eye on him and making sure he got enough
    water. They still aren't admitting anything was wrong with that spin-suit.

    Maybe you start following him in July, but he's not just out there in the spring classics for
    training or jollies, whatever he says. He wants to win. Could be the physical skills necessary for
    winning the tour detract from ability to win spring classics. He's evidently a bit of a flahute.
     
  9. Charlie C.

    Charlie C. Guest

    "Scott Downie" <[email protected]> wrote in news:p[email protected]:

    > Well I guess that was misspoken. Le Tour is a great show of cycling ability. I am just thinking
    > that one race a year does not make a superlative career.

    Lance races more than 1 race per year. Not as many as Mercx (who does?) but still he's not just a
    one-trick pony. Now, the Tour is the only race he really cares about winning (has to win?) but to
    say that he races in only one race is not accurate.

    From http://www.lancearmstrong.com

    2003 March ~ 5-9 - Tour of Murcia, Spain ~ 24-28 - Setmana Catalana, Spain

    April ~ 8-11 - Circuit de la Sarthe, France ~ 20 - Amstel Gold, Netherlands ~ 27 -
    Liège-Bastogne-Liège, Belgium

    May ~ Training month

    June ~ 8-15 - Dauphiné Liberé, France

    This was his schedule this year before the tour and it was a really light schedule.

    2002 Milan San Remo - 44th Criterium International - 2nd Paris-Camembert - 75th Tour Flanders - 59th
    Amstel Gold - 4th Midi Libre - 1st Dauphine - 1st Tour De France - 1st ~ 12-14 - LAF Ride for the
    Roses Weekend
    - Austin, TX

    2001
    - Mar 7-11 Tour of Murcia, Spain
    - Mar 26-30 Semana Catalana, Spain

    - Apr 6- 8 The Ride for the Roses, Austin TX
    - Apr 10-13 Circuit de la Sarthe, France
    - Apr 17 Paris-Camembert, France
    - April 18-22 Tour of Aragon, Spain: 12th GC
    - Apr 28 Amstel Gold, Netherlands: 2nd

    - May 30-June 3 Bicicleta Vasca, Spain

    - Jun 19-28 Tour of Switzerland: GC Winner

    - Jul 7-29 The Tour de France: GC Winner -- Stage Winner: #10 Alpe d'Huez, #12 Mountain TT
    #18 Individual TT
     
  10. "Alan J Bishop" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > >
    > >
    > From a self appointed defender of the holy LA....
    >
    > Who cares what the original source attrribution is - especially when the original source is second
    > or third hand - no morfe than scuttlebutt.


    Regardless of what the source is, crediting someone else's words is standard etiquitte.

    Besides, the original source is cyclingnews.com, no more or no less credible than any other
    news source.
     
  11. Robert Chung

    Robert Chung Guest

    Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
    > "Alan J Bishop" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    >>>
    >>>
    >> From a self appointed defender of the holy LA....
    >>
    >> Who cares what the original source attrribution is - especially when the original source is
    >> second or third hand - no morfe than scuttlebutt.
    >
    >

    >
    > Regardless of what the source is, crediting someone else's words is standard etiquitte.
    >
    > Besides, the original source is cyclingnews.com, no more or no less credible than any other
    > news source.

    There's an economic issue, too. Notice how you don't have to pay to view cyclingnews.com? I'm
    guessing it's cuz it's supported by advertising. The advertising rates are probably dependent on the
    number of eyeballs (perhaps divided by two) that view the site. Post the link and give
    cyclingnews.com the credit it is due.

    As for the attribution issue, while doing a Google search about a year ago I found some stuff I'd
    written show up in someone else's work (for which they claimed copyright). And, a bit more recently
    my wife was asked by a journal to review a newly published book in her field. She thought parts of
    the book were quite well written, especially the four pages that were lifted verbatim from a journal
    article she had published a few years before. Boy was that author busted.
     
  12. Jeff Jones

    Jeff Jones Guest

    "Alan J Bishop" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    >
    > From a self appointed defender of the holy LA....
    >
    > Who cares what the original source attrribution is - especially when the original source is second
    > or third hand - no morfe than scuttlebutt.
    >
    We care, which is why the original LDH item was quoted in the Cyclingnews article. To get first hand
    info why don't you ask Merckx yourself, or listen to Belgian radio/TV and report back to RBR?

    Jeff
     
  13. "Charlie C." <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >
    > Lance races more than 1 race per year. Not as many as Mercx (who does?)

    Merckx.
     
  14. Onefred

    Onefred Guest

    Frankly, I think you hit the nail on the head, curt. Merckx is a self-centered arrogant has-been
    that doesn't like the spot light being stolen from him. If he wants to comment on Lance, then he
    should say a few positive words or nothing at all because Lance has done nothing wrong with his
    career. It's not because other cyclists approach their career differently than Merckx that they must
    be marked invalid. Lance is a fine professional cyclist. I can't believe anyone could complain about
    his career.

    Look at Sampras. He only focused on the Majors, won a bunch of them, and is now being referred to as
    the greatest tennis player ever! Lance knows what he is doing.

    Dave
     
  15. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    "onefred" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > Frankly, I think you hit the nail on the head, curt. Merckx is a
    self-centered arrogant
    > has-been that doesn't like the spot light being stolen from him. If he
    wants to comment
    > on Lance, then he should say a few positive words or nothing at all
    because Lance has done
    > nothing wrong with his career. It's not because other cyclists approach
    their career
    > differently than Merckx that they must be marked invalid. Lance is a fine
    professional
    > cyclist. I can't believe anyone could complain about his career.
    >
    > Look at Sampras. He only focused on the Majors, won a bunch of them, and
    is now being
    > referred to as the greatest tennis player ever! Lance knows what he is
    doing.
    >
    > Dave

    Damn! You set us straight, didn't ya?
     
  16. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    "Jeff Jones" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "Alan J Bishop" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > >
    > > From a self appointed defender of the holy LA....
    > >
    > > Who cares what the original source attrribution is - especially
    when the
    > > original source is second or third hand - no morfe than
    scuttlebutt.
    > >
    > We care, which is why the original LDH item was quoted in the
    Cyclingnews
    > article. To get first hand info why don't you ask Merckx yourself,
    or listen
    > to Belgian radio/TV and report back to RBR?

    Eddy is entitled to his opinions. Let's just remember that he isn't racing anymore. My guess is that
    were he racing now he would be just as particular as Lance. He always was a fussy sucker.
     
  17. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    "onefred" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > Frankly, I think you hit the nail on the head, curt. Merckx is a
    self-centered arrogant
    > has-been that doesn't like the spot light being stolen from him. If
    he wants to comment
    > on Lance, then he should say a few positive words or nothing at all
    because Lance has done
    > nothing wrong with his career. It's not because other cyclists
    approach their career
    > differently than Merckx that they must be marked invalid. Lance is
    a fine professional
    > cyclist. I can't believe anyone could complain about his career.
    >
    > Look at Sampras. He only focused on the Majors, won a bunch of
    them, and is now being
    > referred to as the greatest tennis player ever! Lance knows what he
    is doing.

    What have you accomplished in your life that you can judge Meckx from anything like twenty-seven
    levels below? With that sort of perspective it's pretty hard to see anything but the soles of his
    feet and his butt. If that looks like your own reflection take a hint.
     
  18. Benjo Maso

    Benjo Maso Guest

    "onefred" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > Frankly, I think you hit the nail on the head, curt. Merckx is a
    self-centered arrogant
    > has-been that doesn't like the spot light being stolen from him.

    That's utter nonsense. Merckx is never arrogant, but also extremely courtuous and full of praise of
    all the "greats" who have succeeded him: Hinault, Fignon, Indurain, and also Armstrong. Merckx '
    place in cycling history is secure, and he has nothing to fear. Certainly not Armstrong, a great
    rider but not quite on the same level as his.

    > If he wants to comment on Lance, then he should say a few positive words or nothing at all
    because Lance has done
    > nothing wrong with his career.

    As I said, Merckx has expressed his admiration for Armstrong many many times. However, Merckx is -
    rightly - concerned of the consequences of the way Armstrong's is building his career. The truth is
    that many other races are getting more and more into trouble. For instance, the Société du Tour de
    France is organizing 20 races, but only the Tour and Paris-Roubaix are making money. All the others,
    even Liège-Bastogne-Liège and Paris-Tours, are showing a deficit. Of course, this rather dangerous
    situation isn't helped much when the best rider of these years is deciding to focus his whole season
    on the Tour. It might be good for Amstrong, but it certainly isn't good for bicycle racing and
    Merckx should certainly be allowed to express his concern.

    Benjo Maso
     
  19. "benjo maso" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "onefred" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > > Frankly, I think you hit the nail on the head, curt. Merckx is a
    > self-centered arrogant
    > > has-been that doesn't like the spot light being stolen from him.
    >
    > That's utter nonsense. Merckx is never arrogant, but also extremely courtuous and full of praise
    > of all the "greats" who have succeeded him: Hinault, Fignon, Indurain, and also Armstrong. Merckx
    > ' place in cycling history is secure, and he has nothing to fear. Certainly not Armstrong, a great
    > rider but not quite on the same level as his.
    >
    > > If he wants to comment on Lance, then he should say a few positive words or nothing at all
    > because Lance has done
    > > nothing wrong with his career.
    >
    > As I said, Merckx has expressed his admiration for Armstrong many many times. However, Merckx is -
    > rightly - concerned of the consequences of
    the
    > way Armstrong's is building his career. The truth is that many other races are getting more and
    > more into trouble. For instance, the Société du Tour
    de
    > France is organizing 20 races, but only the Tour and Paris-Roubaix are making money. All the
    > others, even Liège-Bastogne-Liège and Paris-Tours,
    are
    > showing a deficit. Of course, this rather dangerous situation isn't helped much when the best
    > rider of these years is deciding to focus his whole season on the Tour. It might be good for
    > Amstrong, but it certainly isn't good for bicycle racing and Merckx should certainly be allowed to
    > express his concern.

    That has more to do with the press than any one rider. Lemond, Indurain, Riis and Armstrong have
    focused their energies on the TdF because it is the race which garners the most press.

    I agree, it's not healthy for the sport overall, but unless the UCI can figure out a way to change
    the press situation, that's the way it's going to be. The fact that the TdF coincides with the
    European summer holidays is a tidal force not easily overcome by artifice.
     
  20. Onefred

    Onefred Guest

    > Merckx is - rightly - concerned of the consequences of the way Armstrong's is building his career.
    > The truth is that many other races are getting more and more into trouble. For instance, the
    > Société du Tour de France is organizing 20 races, but only the Tour and Paris-Roubaix are making
    > money. All the others, even Liège-Bastogne-Liège and Paris-Tours, are showing a deficit. Of
    > course, this rather dangerous situation isn't helped much when the best rider of these years is
    > deciding to focus his whole season on the Tour. It might be good for Amstrong, but it certainly
    > isn't good for bicycle racing and Merckx should certainly be allowed to express his concern.

    Merckx can express his concern over this unfortunate situation for the sport, but it is NOT Lance's
    fault. The fault lies elsewhere. Merckx is out of line for criticizing Lance's career decisions,
    which is none of his business, frankly. Lance does his job to make money and seems to know exactly
    what he's doing.

    Dave
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...