Where does Lance rank among the greats?

[limerickman]

Tejano - Plenty of thinking to do there, my Discovery supporting friend !

Micron - that is a very detailed list (and doesn't include Zulle, Riis, Berzin, Virenque) re Indurain's opponents.
The more one looks at the class of his competitors, the more tangible Indurains palmares becomes.

I am going to play devils advocate :
Armstrong's opposition :

Beloki, Ullrich, Pantani, Virenque :

Pantani : one TDF and One Giro.
Virenque : KOM.
Beloki : Vuelta.
Doesn't really stack up with either Indurain/Hinault/Merckx opposition, does it.

 

[sopas]

I don't disagree, except with the characterization. Another way of putting this is: "Unlike Armstrong, Indurain did not use every opportunity to conserve his energy by using his supporting teammembers, often choosing instead to ride out front, a tactic which may well have cost him a tour or two."

I think my revision is an overstatement, of course, but it never fails to amuse me that some people think Armstrong's maximizing his team's support is some sort of criticism. His team exists for a single purpose: to shepherd him to a GC result. If he fails, they have failed. I can only imagine what Hincapie or Ekimov would say to Armstrong if he tried to ride out front for no reason. They'd probably smack him in the back of the head and ask him if he remembers why he has teammates.

I try not to get too caught up in the Euro vs. American or old-school vs. modern attitudes about things, but it seems there are still people out there with this romantic idea that it's better to risk failure for the sake of style and panache. That may be fine for some, but to my eyes a boring and conservative rider looks pretty stylish when standing at the top of the podium on the last day.

JMHO.

Hello rejobako,

My statement was not meant as criticism to Armstrong. In fact I think LA does what he has to do, that is what's the team for. My statement was just as a reply to Tejano when he said that: "Any team leader who doesn´t do this is limiting his chances of winning." He involuntarily implies that Indurain won for example the 1994-1995 TdF even limiting his chances of winning!!! because we all know that Indurain almost always rode in front of the peloton. In my opinion in 1994 and 1995 Indurain's team Banesto was very bad, and Miguel had to do almost all the work by himself and still won.

I particularly remember one stage in 1995 before the first TT, when Miguel alone attacked the entire peloton in the flat and broke away with Bruyneel who hardly could keep with Indurain. Behind Miguel the entire peloton, Riis, Rominger, Zulle, and their teams tried to chase Indurain in vain. Bruyneel didn't help Indurain either so at the end he won the Stage and Indurain was second. That day was memorable. Indurain alone in the flat, ridding at 60 km/h against the whole peloton and still they could not cacht up with him.

 

[sopas]

Luc LeBlanc went on a flyer that day.

I remember that stage as well : Stephane Heulot was in yellow and abandoned (crying with knee pain).
Bruyneel nearly got himself killed going over the side of a ravine and got back up and pedalled !
Jalabert looked like he died on that stage.
Boardman looked like death warmed up too.

It was a very cold start to the stage and by the time they hit the final 10kms the temperature had gone up from 6c to 20c, approaching Les Arcs.
Indurain did bonk that day - as he said himself he couldn't remember finishing the stage he was hit that badly.

Yes limerickman,

I saw the entire stage too that day!!
Poor Heulot, I still remember him suffering on the bike!!
I also remember that when Miguel bonked that day the cameras didn't care about the riders in front at all and who was going to win the stage!! The cameras were with Indurain!! Nobody cared who really won, people only cared about what the hell was heppening to the men who had won 5 TdF. That were the news that day.

I also remember that when Indurain bonked that day, when the radio commentator saw him, he said: "that's is not possible, that guy must be Prudencio" Prudencio being Indurain's brother!!! It took a few seconds to everybody to realize that it was indeed our great champion.

 

[mitosis]

Yes, a rider can save up to 30% of his energy by riding protected by his team. That is what LArmstrong does. And now I ask, Did you ever see Indurain ride? Because unlike Armstrong, Miguel was always in front of the peloton never afraid of wasting the theorical 30% of his energy. Perhaps that is why he bonked in 1996 on his way to Les Arcs. I remember that stage very well, before the final climb to Les Arcs there were two other climbs. Indurain led the peloton all day in front as was usual with him in previous years, and at the end he probably paid the price.

I also remember watching that and my heart sank as he suffered.

Riding like this is something Armstrong has not demonstrated in Le Tour and its these aspects of riding, that can't be quantified that mean Armstrong will never be in the same league.

 

[mitosis]

Tejano has also, in his selective use of the hall of fame site, conveniently ignored a graphic display of a comparison of the best cyclists.

http://www.cyclinghalloffame.com/riders/alltime25graph.asp

An all time top 25 that includes points from H of F recognised races puts Armstrong in 6th place, not even half as many points as Mercx and only about 10% more than 25th placed Garrigou.

 

[mitosis]

And while we are looking at the H of F look at the Grand Tours list of all time winners, sprinters and climbers.

LA doesn't even get a mention!

http://www.cyclinghalloffame.com/races/results/results_grand_tours.txt

Where does Lance rank among the greats?

 

[Tejano]

Lance is in a class by himself.

So many records:

1) most dodged bullets (1990/1991 doping lawsuits at UCSF Junior Team) (1999 TDF corticosteroid test) (2000 possession of Actovegin & Insulin)

2) Most endorsement revenues in a 5-year period (2000-2005)

3) Most lawsuits involving doping (6 and counting)

4) Most criminal doping investigations (3 and counting)

5) Most witness tampering investigations (1)

6) Most disgrunted former employees (O'Reily, Swartz, Vaughters, Anderson)

7) most drug tested authors (Sally Jenkins) and journalists dubbed 'friends of LA'

8) Most TDF victories

Yup---LA has broken new ground, especially how the Cancer Foundation is marketed as both an Endorsement Enhancer and Exemption from detailed doping discussions.

It's a terrific global corporate theme for sales.

I´ve never read Walsh´s book so I can´t comment with complete confidence but from what I understand O´Reily´s comments were the most damning. I´ve read where she said LA talked about using EPO!

What the hell does that mean? I think Mr. Walsh has just proven Flyer is doped, ´cause all that cat does is talk about EPO! After Festina I bet a lot of people were talking about using EPO. Or maybe LA was talking about using EPO when he had cancer. What does it really mean?

Walsh has spent what, 5 years of his life trying to take down and destroy LA´s career? That´s pretty twisted! Walsh even admits he has no proof of anything! "[T]he worst kind of journalists" sums it up nicely! Personal vendeta, out to make some money, quite sickening if you ask me! If he was interested in changing the sport there are much more professional and ethical ways to go about it!

I don´t have time now to take down everything you put up there but it is all just as weak! You frame you picture but it doesn´t represent reality.

-Joe Lindsey, June 02, 2005. The Tour de France versus the Giro and the Vuelta, a new book about Lance and contest number 3.

"Inevitably, the subject of drugs comes up. Coyle doesn't shrink from the topic, but he handles it matter-of-factly, without a moral judgment. A fascinating chapter titled "Dr. Evil's Cheese" even offers humor. Dr. Evil is the joking name Armstrong and his associates gave to Dr. Michele Ferrari, Armstrong's longtime coach (one thing that Coyle lays out with little doubt is that Armstrong's relationship with Ferrari was a lot closer than the several-times-a-year meetings Armstrong had described back in 2001, and that, contrary to some statements, Ferrari does not work in concert with Armstrong's more well-known coach, Chris Carmichael).

In the chapter, Ferrari has come to Girona for some testing on Armstrong and had brought him a gift: a large hunk of Parmesan cheese from Ferrari's hometown of Ferrara, Italy. As Coyle sits in with Ferrari, Armstrong's former assistant, Mike Anderson and teammates Landis and George Hincapie, the topic turns to performance enhancement:

"I [Coyle] ask if something as simple as a night's sleep would make a big difference.

'Ahhh, small things, they can be big things,' Ferrari said, holding up a long index finger.

'Naps are illegal, right Michele,' Landis asked teasingly. Ferrari turned to Landis, his birdlike features alight.

'Of course!' he said, his tones rising to high sarcasm. 'Napping is a competitive advantage.'

'That wouldn't be right,' Anderson said drolly.

'Spaghetti too, of course,' Ferrari said.

'Bread,' Landis offered.

Ferrari drew himself to full height, as if he were delivering an address to Congress.
'According to Italian law,' he recited, his index finger bobbing along, 'it is illegal to use any substance or method which enhances athletic performance. So of course naps, they are not allowed.'

'Any substance or method,' Ferrari repeated slowly, to let the idiocy of the law sink in. His dark eyes roved, and landed on the briefcase.

'The cheese!' His raised his voice in a parody of triumph. 'This has many carbohydrates and fats which aid in performance, and so it is highly illegal. It must be banned! It is a good thing there are no police around, no?'"

With humor, and in Ferrari's own words, Coyle deftly paints a picture of a sport pursued by absurd notions of performance enhancement and yet dismissive of its own very real problems. It's funny and chilling at the same time, because it's real.

It's this kind of neutral balance that makes "Lance Armstrong's War" such a good read. Coyle does not shy away from any topic, but avoids putting his own spin on things. As a result, it's the most balanced portrait of Armstrong I've ever read. If, in the lead-up to the Tour, you want an inside look at what it takes to win the Tour, and an all-access pass into the life of the race's largest champion, by all means, pick up Coyle's book. For more information, including where to buy, visit www.booknoise.net/Armstrong. "

 

[limerickman]

Hello rejobako,

My statement was not meant as criticism to Armstrong. In fact I think LA does what he has to do, that is what's the team for. My statement was just as a reply to Tejano when he said that: "Any team leader who doesn´t do this is limiting his chances of winning." He involuntarily implies that Indurain won for example the 1994-1995 TdF even limiting his chances of winning!!! because we all know that Indurain almost always rode in front of the peloton. In my opinion in 1994 and 1995 Indurain's team Banesto was very bad, and Miguel had to do almost all the work by himself and still won.

I particularly remember one stage in 1995 before the first TT, when Miguel alone attacked the entire peloton in the flat and broke away with Bruyneel who hardly could keep with Indurain. Behind Miguel the entire peloton, Riis, Rominger, Zulle, and their teams tried to chase Indurain in vain. Bruyneel didn't help Indurain either so at the end he won the Stage and Indurain was second. That day was memorable. Indurain alone in the flat, ridding at 60 km/h against the whole peloton and still they could not cacht up with him.

I remember that stage too : it was at Liege and MI pulled away from the entire peloton. I reckon BigMig changed tactics deliberately to say to the peloton "I am in good shape !".
Bruyneel said that being behind BigMig "was like being paced by a motorbike,
he was riding that strongly".
Indurain didn't contest the finish - Bruyneel won it.

 

[limerickman]

And while we are looking at the H of F look at the Grand Tours list of all time winners, sprinters and climbers.

LA doesn't even get a mention!

http://www.cyclinghalloffame.com/races/results/results_grand_tours.txt

Where does Lance rank among the greats?

Very good, Mit !
Kinda blows the LA greatest idea out of the water.

 

[MJtje]

I think there are lots of riders ahead of him, if you look at palmares.

A list of 40/50..........and then somewhere armstrong! Anyone?

Very good, Mit !
Kinda blows the LA greatest idea out of the water.

 

[limerickman]

I think there are lots of riders ahead of him, if you look at palmares.

A list of 40/50..........and then somewhere armstrong! Anyone?

They'll accuse you of being "anti-Armstrong" !

 

[Tejano]

Tejano has also, in his selective use of the hall of fame site, conveniently ignored a graphic display of a comparison of the best cyclists.

http://www.cyclinghalloffame.com/riders/alltime25graph.asp

An all time top 25 that includes points from H of F recognised races puts Armstrong in 6th place, not even half as many points as Mercx and only about 10% more than 25th placed Garrigou.

I didn´t ignor anything. Like i´ve said before nowadays top riders ride less so they don´ñt have the overall wins as in the past. But to take from that that all the riders from the past are better than riders today because they rode more is ignorant!

TDF not national tours is where LA is the best! LA isn´t the best national tour rider but he is the best TDF rider! TDF is the greatest race so LA is the greatest rider! No human living or dead has won more T´sDF!

 

[mitosis]

I didn´t ignor anything. Like i´ve said before nowadays top riders ride less so they don´ñt have the overall wins as in the past. But to take from that that all the riders from the past are better than riders today because they rode more is ignorant!

TDF not national tours is where LA is the best! LA isn´t the best national tour rider but he is the best TDF rider! TDF is the greatest race so LA is the greatest rider! No human living or dead has won more T´sDF!

LOL. I thought you'd lost it before but what you just wrote proves it.

You're the one who brought up the hall of fame. You can either use it for your argument or not but if you want you can only conclude that your man doesn't rate.

You can choose to ignore history. Any objective person can't.

Your argument that the race has changed is irrelevant.

In this last post you have made a joke of your own arguments.

Hopefully the blue train will be derailed this year so that people like you who've been interested in cycling for 5 minutes will fade away and leave the sport to the 84% of people who disagree with you and who have a genuine objective interest in it.

 

[limerickman]

I didn´t ignor anything. Like i´ve said before nowadays top riders ride less so they don´ñt have the overall wins as in the past. But to take from that that all the riders from the past are better than riders today because they rode more is ignorant!

TDF not national tours is where LA is the best! LA isn´t the best national tour rider but he is the best TDF rider! TDF is the greatest race so LA is the greatest rider! No human living or dead has won more T´sDF!

You've lost it.

 

[Tejano]

LOL. I thought you'd lost it before but what you just wrote proves it.

You're the one who brought up the hall of fame. You can either use it for your argument or not but if you want you can only conclude that your man doesn't rate.

You can choose to ignore history. Any objective person can't.

Your argument that the race has changed is irrelevant.

In this last post you have made a joke of your own arguments.

Hopefully the blue train will be derailed this year so that people like you who've been interested in cycling for 5 minutes will fade away and leave the sport to the 84% of people who disagree with you and who have a genuine objective interest in it.

I don´t think LA is the best national tour rider!
I don´t think LA has the best palmares!

But to look at national tours or palmares to compare riders across eras is just plain stupid!

Stupid is as stupid does!

Racing has changed period! by using palmares old school riders have an unjust advantage! There was less overall competition in the past and a weaker pool of riders in general!

For example in 1974 Eddie Merckx beat Raymond Poulidor by 8:04!

In 1974 EM was 29 yrs old.
In 1974 RP was 38 yrs old!

Jes@s Chr#t! Eddie´s closest competitor was thirty fricken eight years old!!!!
Talk about competition! Can you imagine a 38 year old rider finishing on the podium of a TDF nowadays? You gotta be joking buddy! Does anyone think Polidor at 38 would be more competition to LA than JU represents! GIVE ME A BREAK! LET´S GET REAL!

Eddie beat that 38 year old rider by 19 seconds in the final 37.5 km ITT!

 

[limerickman]

1974 TDF GC : looks like Poulidor beat a lot of other GC contenders younger than him !
(Pou-Pou was second in the world championships too in 1974 !)

1. Eddy MERCKX (Bel) 116h16'58"
2. Raymond Poulidor (Fra) 8'04" (age 38).
3. Vicente Lopez-Carril (Esp) 8'09" (age 26)
4. Wladimiro Panizza (Ita) 10'59" (age 28)
5. Gonzalo Aja (Esp) 11'24"
6. Joaquim Agostinho (Por) 14'24" (age 32)
7. Michel Pollentier (Bel) 16'34" (age 23)
8. Mariano Martinez (Fra) 18'33" (age 24)
9. Alain Santy (Fra) 19'55"
10. Herman Van Springel (Bel) 24'11" (age 31).

Looks like Poulidor was good competition in 1974 !

 

[Tejano]

You've lost it.

Number of races rode and number of races won is irrelevant!

It´s the quality of the race and the quality of the competition!
If Eddie was far and away the best rider of his generation and rode in numerous races it is only logical he would win many races!

I think Eddie is the second greatest of all time. There´s no shame in that!

Modern riders have more competition therefore they target fewwer races!
Modern riders don´t target as many races therefore they win fewwer races!
Modern riders can peak at a higher level than old school riders but only for a few weeks, this gives a rider the optimum chance at winning the greatest of all races!

Stages and jerseys in the TDF are no longer important to GC contenders!
Winnning two national tours is no longer important to GC contenders!
Having a stacked palmares is no longer important to GC contenders!
The only thing that is important to a TDF GC contender is giving everything they have for three weeks in July to be considered the greatest cyclist for that year!

The only valid way to compare riders of different eras is by looking at the TDF final GC! It has always been the most prestigious race with the best competition!

 

[limerickman]

Number of races rode and number of races won is irrelevant!

It´s the quality of the race and the quality of the competition!
If Eddie was far and away the best rider of his generation and rode in numerous races it is only logical he would win many races!

I think Eddie is the second greatest of all time. There´s no shame in that!

Modern riders have more competition therefore they target fewwer races!
Modern riders don´t target as many races therefore they win fewwer races!
Modern riders can peak at a higher level than old school riders but only for a few weeks, this gives a rider the optimum chance at winning the greatest of all races!

Stages and jerseys in the TDF are no longer important to GC contenders!
Winnning two national tours is no longer important to GC contenders!
Having a stacked palmares is no longer important to GC contenders!
The only thing that is important to a TDF GC contender is giving everything they have for three weeks in July to be considered the greatest cyclist for that year!

The only valid way to compare riders of different eras is by looking at the TDF final GC! It has always been the most prestigious race with the best competition!

as I said - you've lost it.

 

[Tejano]

1974 TDF GC : looks like Poulidor beat a lot of other GC contenders younger than him !
(Pou-Pou was second in the world championships too in 1974 !)

1. Eddy MERCKX (Bel) 116h16'58"
2. Raymond Poulidor (Fra) 8'04" (age 38).
3. Vicente Lopez-Carril (Esp) 8'09" (age 26)
4. Wladimiro Panizza (Ita) 10'59" (age 28)
5. Gonzalo Aja (Esp) 11'24"
6. Joaquim Agostinho (Por) 14'24" (age 32)
7. Michel Pollentier (Bel) 16'34" (age 23)
8. Mariano Martinez (Fra) 18'33" (age 24)
9. Alain Santy (Fra) 19'55"
10. Herman Van Springel (Bel) 24'11" (age 31).

Looks like Poulidor was good competition in 1974 !

That´s my point! How is a 38 year old rider competative! Simply put, there was no real competition!

 

[limerickman]

That´s my point! How is a 38 year old rider competative! Simply put, there was no real competition!

Yeah Einstein - and the others on GC - are they all 38 too ?
Try reading the post before replying, it helps.

Poulidor finished 4th in the 1974 Super Prestige compeition : precursor of the UCI ratings which you are so fond of.

If Poulidor was such an old (and bad) rider, how come he finished ahead of VanImpe, Pollentier, Gimondi, Theveanet (all younger riders) in that years results