Most boring TDF ever?

gwhite said:

internaute said:

Nope no question about it. It WAS the most boring ever. Thanks Lance.

I am not satisfied by any french or italian, each new generation is more
lazy than the last and the tour has lost all its interest

LOL. It is Lance's fault the other douchebags don't show up with
sufficient conditioning to make a race out of it.

Let's make bike racing socialistic, where everyone is a winner. HFS.

It is - the whole team shares the winner's money.
Didn't Lemond once say it was the only socialist sport?
All the best
Dan Gregory

internaute said:

"gwhite" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

internaute said:

Nope no question about it. It WAS the most boring ever. Thanks Lance.

I am not satisfied by any french or italian, each new generation is more
lazy than the last and the tour has lost all its interest

LOL. It is Lance's fault the other douchebags don't show up with
sufficient conditioning to make a race out of it.

Let's make bike racing socialistic, where everyone is a winner. HFS.

for the last time it's not a question of Lance or that he is american, it's
would have been the same boring tour if it was Ullrich that had finished
first this year

Probably also true... It's scary that the real exitement was the time
gap for 4-5, .021sec or so I hear. Supose Vino and Levi had needed to
sprint for it instead of the GC times being taken onthe first entrance
to Champs E... Now when is San Sebastian?

"Take yesterday's TT. That wasn't boring. Just watching Rabobank's
inept crew
was far less than boring. Maybe they started the champaign a day too
early? "

Rabobank crew was beyond inept in their aid to Rasmussen. That poor guy
with such fools in the team car.
The levity was nice but it was tragicomedy when you consider poor
Michael Rasmussen. (satge 20 ITT)

Goddam, team Subway would've had more competent drivers and mechanics.
My local Performance Bike Shop wrench would outshine those jokesters as
well.

-Ken

internaute said:

"gwhite" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

internaute said:

Nope no question about it. It WAS the most boring ever. Thanks Lance.

I am not satisfied by any french or italian, each new generation is more
lazy than the last and the tour has lost all its interest

LOL. It is Lance's fault the other douchebags don't show up with
sufficient conditioning to make a race out of it.

Let's make bike racing socialistic, where everyone is a winner. HFS.

for the last time it's not a question of Lance or that he is american, it's
would have been the same boring tour if it was Ullrich that had finished
first this year

Yeah, fer Bobsakes, don't blame the winner, blame the competition.

Fred Marx said:

gwhite said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

LOL. It is Lance's fault the other douchebags don't show up with
sufficient conditioning to make a race out of it.

the oft parroted retort to this statement the other "douchebags" have to
race a real program, not just show up for three week engagments in France.

Why would someone invest in "A" for a 10% return when they could
otherwise invest in "B" and get a 100% return? Why would Lance invest
in the "real program" when he is better invested in the 3-week show?
Risking the high return of the 3-week show for the low return of the
"real program" would be retarded.

Whether you, me, or anyone else likes it, the TdF has disproportionate
returns for a US rider with sufficient talent to win. That's just the
way it is. It doesn't matter if it is called hype or whatever. The TdF
"is what it is" as far as the mass of the American public goes: the
biggest show (by far) of bike racing.

Lance is a sporting superstar to the American public, and it is because
he won the TdF. He'd scarcely be noticed in the US if he won 100
classics/monuments. In the US, he can capitalize on TdF wins where he
could not capitalize on classics wins. He'd be an idiot to have not
done what he was capable of doing: win the TdF time after time. It was
the same deal for Lemond.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Let's make bike racing socialistic, where everyone is a winner. HFS.

You mean like Little League Baseball?

I don't know anymore. But when I played it, we kept score.

American racers don't share your opinion, which explains why they did
so much better.

-ilan

DON'T SPEAK FOR ALL AMERICANS, A-HOLE. We are not all as ignorant as you
and there are many that can think on a more global scale. I suggest you
keep you hole shut because you really sound like an ass.

"internaute" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"gwhite" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

internaute said:

Nope no question about it. It WAS the most boring ever. Thanks
Lance.

I am not satisfied by any french or italian, each new generation is
more
lazy than the last and the tour has lost all its interest

LOL. It is Lance's fault the other douchebags don't show up with
sufficient conditioning to make a race out of it.

Let's make bike racing socialistic, where everyone is a winner. HFS.

for the last time it's not a question of Lance or that he is american,
it's
would have been the same boring tour if it was Ullrich that had
finished
first this year

You thanked Lance for making it a boring TDF. You're back pedaling too
hard and the cheese has slipped off your cracker.

Phil H

tsarkon said:

Nope no question about it. It WAS the most boring ever. Thanks Lance.

What's really stupid about trolls like this is that it's not
even true - it's quite clear that the 2002 Tour was the least
suspenseful of any in the Armstrong era.

tsarkon said:

Nope no question about it. It WAS the most boring ever. Thanks Lance.

Dumbass -

Some of Indurain's were more boring and certainly some of Merckx's were
as well as some of Coppi's (the last 2 guys had some fairly obscene
time diferences at the finish).

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

tsarkon said:

Nope no question about it. It WAS the most boring ever. Thanks Lance.

I couldn't say because I never watched it *at all*. One time of day I
used to get to work for 6am so I could go home early to watch the last
few hours live. I would spend lots of money to be at stage starts and
finishes, even taking my holiday in order to come home to the UK for
the 1994 race. No longer.

I'm not sure which were more boring - the Armstrong years or the
Indurain years - either way the past 15 years have been largely a waste
of viewing time if you remember the way the tour used to be. How many
real contested races in that time? 2? 2 and a half? OK, individual
stages are probably exciting but not usually in the context of the
overal result.

OTOH, Armstrong's success has raised the profile of the tour, if not
cycling in general. But at what cost? I know quite a few
disillusioned pre-Armstrong fans. Jeez, I doubt if I'll ever bother
with it again now that it's down to a 1, 2, sometimes 3 man race. What
could be more boring that watching two or three guys racing over three
weeks?!

Unfortunately, I think the worst is yet to come.

Roll on the Spring and some real racing say I!

Cheers

UD

P.S. Lance's best win - by a long way - was the Worlds RR in Oslo.
That day he was a true champion, in the Tour he's only ever been doing
his job.

tsarkon said:

Nope no question about it. It WAS the most boring ever. Thanks Lance.

I couldn't say because I never watched it *at all*. One time of day I
used to get to work for 6am so I could go home early to watch the last
few hours live. I would spend lots of money to be at stage starts and
finishes, even taking my holiday in order to come home to the UK for
the 1994 race. No longer.

I'm not sure which were more boring - the Armstrong years or the
Indurain years - either way the past 15 years have been largely a waste
of viewing time if you remember the way the tour used to be. How many
real contested races in that time? 2? 2 and a half? OK, individual
stages are probably exciting but not usually in the context of the
overal result.

OTOH, Armstrong's success has raised the profile of the tour, if not
cycling in general. But at what cost? I know quite a few
disillusioned pre-Armstrong fans. Jeez, I doubt if I'll ever bother
with it again now that it's down to a 1, 2, sometimes 3 man race. What
could be more boring that watching two or three guys racing over three
weeks?!

Unfortunately, I think the worst is yet to come.

Roll on the Spring and some real racing say I!

Cheers

UD

P.S. Lance's best win - by a long way - was the Worlds RR in Oslo.
That day he was a true champion, in the Tour he's only ever been doing
his job.

tsarkon said:

Nope no question about it. It WAS the most boring ever. Thanks Lance.

I couldn't say because I never watched it *at all*. One time of day I
used to get to work for 6am so I could go home early to watch the last
few hours live. I would spend lots of money to be at stage starts and
finishes, even taking my holiday in order to come home to the UK for
the 1994 race. No longer.

I'm not sure which were more boring - the Armstrong years or the
Indurain years - either way the past 15 years have been largely a waste
of viewing time if you remember the way the tour used to be. How many
real contested races in that time? 2? 2 and a half? OK, individual
stages are probably exciting but not usually in the context of the
overal result.

OTOH, Armstrong's success has raised the profile of the tour, if not
cycling in general. But at what cost? I know quite a few
disillusioned pre-Armstrong fans. Jeez, I doubt if I'll ever bother
with it again now that it's down to a 1, 2, sometimes 3 man race. What
could be more boring that watching two or three guys racing over three
weeks?!

Unfortunately, I think the worst is yet to come.

Roll on the Spring and some real racing say I!

Cheers

UD

P.S. Lance's best win - by a long way - was the Worlds RR in Oslo.
That day he was a true champion, in the Tour he's only ever been doing
his job.

tsarkon said:

Nope no question about it. It WAS the most boring ever. Thanks Lance.

I couldn't say because I never watched it *at all*. One time of day I
used to get to work for 6am so I could go home early to watch the last
few hours live. I would spend lots of money to be at stage starts and
finishes, even taking my holiday in order to come home to the UK for
the 1994 race. No longer.

I'm not sure which were more boring - the Armstrong years or the
Indurain years - either way the past 15 years have been largely a waste
of viewing time if you remember the way the tour used to be. How many
real contested races in that time? 2? 2 and a half? OK, individual
stages are probably exciting but not usually in the context of the
overal result.

OTOH, Armstrong's success has raised the profile of the tour, if not
cycling in general. But at what cost? I know quite a few
disillusioned pre-Armstrong fans. Jeez, I doubt if I'll ever bother
with it again now that it's down to a 1, 2, sometimes 3 man race. What
could be more boring that watching two or three guys racing over three
weeks?!

Unfortunately, I think the worst is yet to come.

Roll on the Spring and some real racing say I!

Cheers

UD

P.S. Lance's best win - by a long way - was the Worlds RR in Oslo.
That day he was a true champion, in the Tour he's only ever been doing
his job.

tsarkon said:

Nope no question about it. It WAS the most boring ever. Thanks Lance.

I couldn't say because I never watched it *at all*. One time of day I
used to get to work for 6am so I could go home early to watch the last
few hours live. I would spend lots of money to be at stage starts and
finishes, even taking my holiday in order to come home to the UK for
the 1994 race. No longer.

I'm not sure which were more boring - the Armstrong years or the
Indurain years - either way the past 15 years have been largely a waste
of viewing time if you remember the way the tour used to be. How many
real contested races in that time? 2? 2 and a half? OK, individual
stages are probably exciting but not usually in the context of the
overal result.

OTOH, Armstrong's success has raised the profile of the tour, if not
cycling in general. But at what cost? I know quite a few
disillusioned pre-Armstrong fans. Jeez, I doubt if I'll ever bother
with it again now that it's down to a 1, 2, sometimes 3 man race. What
could be more boring that watching two or three guys racing over three
weeks?!

Unfortunately, I think the worst is yet to come.

Roll on the Spring and some real racing say I!

Cheers

UD

P.S. Lance's best win - by a long way - was the Worlds RR in Oslo.
That day he was a true champion, in the Tour he's only ever been doing
his job.

tsarkon said:

Nope no question about it. It WAS the most boring ever. Thanks Lance.

I couldn't say because I never watched it *at all*. One time of day I
used to get to work for 6am so I could go home early to watch the last
few hours live. I would spend lots of money to be at stage starts and
finishes, even taking my holiday in order to come home to the UK for
the 1994 race. No longer.

I'm not sure which were more boring - the Armstrong years or the
Indurain years - either way the past 15 years have been largely a waste
of viewing time if you remember the way the tour used to be. How many
real contested races in that time? 2? 2 and a half? OK, individual
stages are probably exciting but not usually in the context of the
overal result.

OTOH, Armstrong's success has raised the profile of the tour, if not
cycling in general. But at what cost? I know quite a few
disillusioned pre-Armstrong fans. Jeez, I doubt if I'll ever bother
with it again now that it's down to a 1, 2, sometimes 3 man race. What
could be more boring that watching two or three guys racing over three
weeks?!

Unfortunately, I think the worst is yet to come.

Roll on the Spring and some real racing say I!

Cheers

UD

P.S. Lance's best win - by a long way - was the Worlds RR in Oslo.
That day he was a true champion, in the Tour he's only ever been doing
his job.

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Some of Indurain's were more boring and certainly some of Merckx's were
as well as some of Coppi's (the last 2 guys had some fairly obscene
time diferences at the finish).

I dunno - at least there was still some romance about it in those days.
Indurain's weren't so much boring as numbing ;-)

UD

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Some of Indurain's were more boring and certainly some of Merckx's were
as well as some of Coppi's (the last 2 guys had some fairly obscene
time diferences at the finish).

I dunno - at least there was still some romance about it in those days.
Indurain's weren't so much boring as numbing ;-)

UD

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Some of Indurain's were more boring and certainly some of Merckx's were
as well as some of Coppi's (the last 2 guys had some fairly obscene
time diferences at the finish).

I dunno - at least there was still some romance about it in those days.
Indurain's weren't so much boring as numbing ;-)

UD

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Some of Indurain's were more boring and certainly some of Merckx's were
as well as some of Coppi's (the last 2 guys had some fairly obscene
time diferences at the finish).

I dunno - at least there was still some romance about it in those days.
Indurain's weren't so much boring as numbing ;-)

UD

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Some of Indurain's were more boring and certainly some of Merckx's were
as well as some of Coppi's (the last 2 guys had some fairly obscene
time diferences at the finish).

I dunno - at least there was still some romance about it in those days.
Indurain's weren't so much boring as numbing ;-)

UD