Where does Lance rank among the greats?

[sopas]

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

How the hell is the almost 34 year old Armstrong competitive!!!!!!!!!! Perhaps he faces no real competition either?????

How the hell did Romminger win the Giro de Italia in 1995 when he was 35 years old?? and in 1996 at 36 he made it to the second place in the Vuelta at 36!!!!!!!!!

How the hell did Obree win the World Championchip at 38 in the 80's????

Tejeno you have not seen enough cycli

 

[limerickman]

Sopas - it's called moving the Tejano goalposts !

 

[MJtje]

LA won't agree with you here......he's stated that merckx is the best.......but go on interesting reading!

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]

LA won't agree with you here......he's stated that merckx is the best.......but go on interesting reading!

I disagree with you - it was interesting earlier, but now it's quite boring.

Incidentally, Cycle Sport Magazine in 1999 : took a Top50 of all time poll :
the result in chronological order :

Merckx, Hinault, Indurain, Coppi, Anquetil, Van Steenbergen, Van Looy, LeMond,
Rominger, POULIDOR.

 

[rejobako]

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.

While I disagree with Tejano's thesis, I also disagree with this statement. IMO, the Armstrong phenomenon has certainly brought a lot of attention to the sport of cycling by "bandwagoners", many of whom will return to watching other sports when the TdF is no longer dominated by the American superstar. Then again, I'm just a clueless American myself, who was initially captivated by cycling when LeMond broke through in the 80s. While he was the reason I was initially drawn to the sport, when he left my interest in it did not diminish.

I confess that I'm not particularly captivated by the classics, which seem to be so much more important to many longstanding cycling fans. There's something about the dynamics and strategies involved in grinding out a long 3-week tour, whether it be in Spain, France, or Italy, that makes the sport so interesting to me. But the fact is, if there had been no LeMond, I doubt whether I'd have ever paid attention to cycling for long enough to know how wonderful the sport is, no matter who is riding. Whereas certainly there are many who believe themselves to be cycling fans who don't know their palmares from their peletons, I believe that there are many people like me, who have been drawn to the sport because of a particular star, who will be cycling fans forever.

In addition, I don't think anyone on this forum has a truly "objective" opinion. Certainly, Tejano's views are a bit over-the-top, but everyone in here has demonstrated that they have some level of subjective bias. Wishing all the Disco fans to "go away" because you disagree with them, for example, is a bit revealing. I confess I'm rooting for Armstrong to win again this year, because although by all accounts he can be a real *******, I admire the tenacity and determination with which he has dominated the race he points to every year. (Although as I've said, I hope it's close between him and Ullrich, because I want to be treated to just one more titanic duel between the two of them.)

As for the topic, I don't think there's any way to convincingly argue that Armstrong is the greatest cyclist ever. He is very arguably, however, the greatest TdF rider in history. As far as individual cycling achievements is concerned, every rider in the world would want to win the TdF GC title more than any other competition. And Armstrong has managed it more times than anyone. To argue against him, you have to start dwelling in minutia like stage wins and polka-dot jerseys. I could be wrong, but my guess is that Virenque would trade very one of his mountain jerseys for just one GC title, because he knows as well as anyone that history is not measured in points, but in time.

 

[Flyer]

Tejano never had 'it' to begin with.

He cannot lose what he never possessed.

He is a LA fanatic otherwise ignorant of sport in general, cycling in specific.

He probably believes that Chris Carmichael is Lance's so-called coach. Or that a hormone depleting work ethic is Lance secret weapon (post cancer.) I guess he was lazy 1991-1996?

And that Michele Ferrari, per Bill Stapleton; 'trainer' on other days, 'performance consultant', is a charming, not-for-profit cadence instructor.

And Emma O'Reilly, Greg Lemond, Mike Anderson, Steven Swartz, just jealous liars.

Oh, and btw: EPO is the aspirin on the peloton now.

The big dogs use other go-juice for key events.

Tejano, keep up your trash talking as the next Tour de Dope begins. Your boy will be exposed someday.

as I said - you've lost it.

 

[Flyer]

While I disagree with Tejano's thesis, I also disagree with this statement. IMO, the Armstrong phenomenon has certainly brought a lot of attention to the sport of cycling by "bandwagoners", many of whom will return to watching other sports when the TdF is no longer dominated by the American superstar. Then again, I'm just a clueless American myself, who was initially captivated by cycling when LeMond broke through in the 80s. While he was the reason I was initially drawn to the sport, when he left my interest in it did not diminish.

I confess that I'm not particularly captivated by the classics, which seem to be so much more important to many longstanding cycling fans. There's something about the dynamics and strategies involved in grinding out a long 3-week tour, whether it be in Spain, France, or Italy, that makes the sport so interesting to me. But the fact is, if there had been no LeMond, I doubt whether I'd have ever paid attention to cycling for long enough to know how wonderful the sport is, no matter who is riding. Whereas certainly there are many who believe themselves to be cycling fans who don't know their palmares from their peletons, I believe that there are many people like me, who have been drawn to the sport because of a particular star, who will be cycling fans forever.

In addition, I don't think anyone on this forum has a truly "objective" opinion. Certainly, Tejano's views are a bit over-the-top, but everyone in here has demonstrated that they have some level of subjective bias. Wishing all the Disco fans to "go away" because you disagree with them, for example, is a bit revealing. I confess I'm rooting for Armstrong to win again this year, because although by all accounts he can be a real *******, I admire the tenacity and determination with which he has dominated the race he points to every year. (Although as I've said, I hope it's close between him and Ullrich, because I want to be treated to just one more titanic duel between the two of them.)

As for the topic, I don't think there's any way to convincingly argue that Armstrong is the greatest cyclist ever. He is very arguably, however, the greatest TdF rider in history. As far as individual cycling achievements is concerned, every rider in the world would want to win the TdF GC title more than any other competition. And Armstrong has managed it more times than anyone. To argue against him, you have to start dwelling in minutia like stage wins and polka-dot jerseys. I could be wrong, but my guess is that Virenque would trade very one of his mountain jerseys for just one GC title, because he knows as well as anyone that history is not measured in points, but in time.

You forgot to mention Marco Pantani----the last man to win the Tour, not named Lance.

Pantani is dead (age 34), and Virenque is probably more envious that LA never had the Festina drug bust to deal with.

Depsit his utter guilt and complicity in it (alonf with Alex Zulle) they denied and denied (until the Lille trial) then served mino suspensions (6 months) and returned to work.

Armstrong benefited tremendously from these doping revelations as TDF organizers and their advertisers NEVER again would permit a doping scandal to interupt their commercial venture.

Lance enjoyed this exemption as well as his cancer survivor exemption!

Who cares if his drugs work so well---it's cool!

 

[rejobako]

Tejano never had 'it' to begin with.

He cannot lose what he never possessed.

He is a LA fanatic otherwise ignorant of sport in general, cycling in specific.

He probably believes that Chris Carmichael is Lance's so-called coach. Or that a hormone depleting work ethic is Lance secret weapon (post cancer.) I guess he was lazy 1991-1996?

And that Michele Ferrari, per Bill Stapleton; 'trainer' on other days, 'performance consultant', is a charming, not-for-profit cadence instructor.

And Emma O'Reilly, Greg Lemond, Mike Anderson, Steven Swartz, just jealous liars.

Oh, and btw: EPO is the aspirin on the peloton now.

The big dogs use other go-juice for key events.

Tejano, keep up your trash talking as the next Tour de Dope begins. Your boy will be exposed someday.

LOL. (Look, mitosis, here's another "genuine objective" opinion.)

 

[Flyer]

Gotta balance in some facts in order to offset 'fairytale mania' that often follows Tour de Lance.

Was not Michele Ferrari convicted? (2004)

How do I know that Filippo Simeoni is a liar, under oath? Or why am I angery at a truthteller?

Who are Greg Strock & Erich Kaiter? (1991)

How do retroactive TUEs work? (TDF 1999)

How is Actovegin & insulin injected? (TDF 2000)
Why did my former friend (upstairs neighbor) and teammate get busted for blood doping?

How come my so-called work ethic only worked after a massive rebuild with madman Doctor Ferrari?

Why are my former employees ratting me out?

Why does Greg Lemond say I have a big secret?

How come that evil David Walsh is also and award winning respected journalist whose career is longer than mine.

Why won't everyone just believe my commercials?

Why do a despise whistleblowers? (Christopher Bassons)

Can't we all just get along and pay me your money and not complain?

 

[rejobako]

You forgot to mention Marco Pantani----the last man to win the Tour, not named Lance.

Pantani is dead (age 34), and Virenque is probably more envious that LA never had the Festina drug bust to deal with.

Depsit his utter guilt and complicity in it (alonf with Alex Zulle) they denied and denied (until the Lille trial) then served mino suspensions (6 months) and returned to work.

Armstrong benefited tremendously from these doping revelations as TDF organizers and their advertisers NEVER again would permit a doping scandal to interupt their commercial venture.

Lance enjoyed this exemption as well as his cancer survivor exemption!

Who cares if his drugs work so well---it's cool!

Another interesting theory; so you're saying that the TdF GC-contending superstars can ride stages shooting needles into their arms because the organizers don't want another scandal? And that Armstrong get's "extra special" treatment because he's a cancer survivor?

Ummmmm, OK. (And I thought Tejano was off the deep end.)

First of all, it is my understanding that drug testing during the Tour is conducted under the auspices of the UCI and the French cycling federation in conjunction with Tour organizers. So your conspiracy theory must necessarily extend to two other independent organizations. Anything's possible, but not necessarily plausible.

 

[MJtje]

Flyer will be very happy, because this year WADA will watch.......right? And get to learn Flyer better.............doping is the biggest issue in the world! Perspective he still needs to get.....

Another interesting theory; so you're saying that the TdF GC-contending superstars can ride stages shooting needles into their arms because the organizers don't want another scandal? And that Armstrong get's "extra special" treatment because he's a cancer survivor?

Ummmmm, OK. (And I thought Tejano was off the deep end.)

First of all, it is my understanding that drug testing during the Tour is conducted under the auspices of the UCI and the French cycling federation in conjunction with Tour organizers. So your conspiracy theory must necessarily extend to two other independent organizations. Anything's possible, but not necessarily plausible.

 

[rejobako]

Gotta balance in some facts in order to offset 'fairytale mania' that often follows Tour de Lance.

To many, your litany of unproven innuendo is as much of a "fairytale". The only concrete fact in any of this is that the man has never failed a drug test.

Oh, I forgot, that's because the UCI, the Tour organizers, and the French cycling federation let him dope to his heart's content to avoid another "scandal".

 

[Flyer]

As a pro who raced the Tour--and was close to the yellow jersey wearer, once told me----'the only thing going on inside a doping control van is an autograph session'.

Copies of USA Today are offerred up to Americans of lessor stature.

Check your TDF history: The last yellow jersey to be DQed in the Tour de France was: 1978, Michel Pollentier.

He got a 30 day suspension for using a rubber hose/bladder whizinator device.

Long live the drug-testing compliance charade!

btw: for both 2004 & 2005 very few doping tests have been performed.

WADA has less money for ALL SPORTS than does Lance. Purely for appearances.

There is no serious drug testing!

Housekeepers, police and customs agents catch most dopers, not WADA or the UCI.

Another interesting theory; so you're saying that the TdF GC-contending superstars can ride stages shooting needles into their arms because the organizers don't want another scandal? And that Armstrong get's "extra special" treatment because he's a cancer survivor?

Ummmmm, OK. (And I thought Tejano was off the deep end.)

First of all, it is my understanding that drug testing during the Tour is conducted under the auspices of the UCI and the French cycling federation in conjunction with Tour organizers. So your conspiracy theory must necessarily extend to two other independent organizations. Anything's possible, but not necessarily plausible.

 

[Flyer]

You are as lost as Tejano:

Concrete or mud? My tales are nonfiction.

As Lance ever been tested?

for hGH? No test!

Interlukins? No test!

designer Nandrolone? No test!

testosterone/clomid/hCG T/E ratio: Easy to beat!

insulin/glucose feeds? No test!

stimulants? Easy to beat!

dynEPO? No test!

CERA? No test!

HBOCs blood spinners? No test!

Corticosteroids? TUE in place per 1999 mistake!

Actovegin (cow plasma) not on banned list in 2000.

Looks like the most 'UNTESTED" man in sport!

Fairytale or brutal truth?

To many, your litany of unproven innuendo is as much of a "fairytale". The only concrete fact in any of this is that the man has never failed a drug test.

Oh, I forgot, that's because the UCI, the Tour organizers, and the French cycling federation let him dope to his heart's content to avoid another "scandal".

 

[Tejano]

How the hell is the almost 34 year old Armstrong competitive!!!!!!!!!! Perhaps he faces no real competition either?????

How the hell did Romminger win the Giro de Italia in 1995 when he was 35 years old?? and in 1996 at 36 he made it to the second place in the Vuelta at 36!!!!!!!!!

How the hell did Obree win the World Championchip at 38 in the 80's????

Tejeno you have not seen enough cycli

It´s an interesting theory and I will tie it all together! Right now I´m feeling out my competition!

By the way I made a mistake on my Merckx LA comparison with the Cycling Hall of Fame.com criteria. I forgot to add EM 2nd place finish leaving him with interesting enough 8400pts the exact total LA will have if he wins this year! They will be tied using their criteria! I guess the tie breaker would be most overall wins and LA would just beat out Merckx.

http://www.cyclinghalloffame.com/riders/rankings/ranking_tour_de_france.txt

I only said best TDF rider of all time!

By the way the GIRO is nothing compared to the TDF! Rominger won the Giro at 35! No podium in the TDF at 38! Raymond actually finished 3rd I think two years later at 40! There must have been a lot of good riders out their if a 40 year old is on the podium! Impossible today! Too competitive!

 

[rejobako]

Looks like the most 'UNTESTED" man in sport!

I certainly hope you are not suggesting that all the other cyclists are tested for substances which Armstrong is not. If that is not your assertion, then "man" in your quote above should be changed to "men", in which case there's no particular reason for you to single out Armstrong for criticism, unless of course it just galls the hell out of you that he keeps winning the world's premier cycling event.

 

[MJtje]

Depends WHO in yellow Flyer is referring to......he quoted someone (a pro) close to the yellow jersey......was he on the same team as lance, and was LA in yellow......or was it before the LA years??

I certainly hope you are not suggesting that all the other cyclists are tested for substances which Armstrong is not. If that is not your assertion, then "man" in your quote above should be changed to "men", in which case there's no particular reason for you to single out Armstrong for criticism, unless of course it just galls the hell out of you that he keeps winning the world's premier cycling event.

 

[Flyer]

Well it is tricky to pick a TDF leader who is not doping---so many have proven to do so.

Fignon was a doper, Merckx was a doper, Coppi was a doper, Anquetil was a doper, Zulle was a doper, Verinque was a doper, Pantani was a doper, et al....

Only the Giro and the Vuelta have actually thrown a leader out of the race.

Gotta love the TDF business ethics.

Depends WHO in yellow Flyer is referring to......he quoted someone (a pro) close to the yellow jersey......was he on the same team as lance, and was LA in yellow......or was it before the LA years??

 

[MJtje]

Still my question.......which you probably won't answer.

Well it is tricky to pick a TDF leader who is not doping---so many have proven to do so.

Fignon was a doper, Merckx was a doper, Coppi was a doper, Anquetil was a doper, Zulle was a doper, Verinque was a doper, Pantani was a doper, et al....

Only the Giro and the Vuelta have actually thrown a leader out of the race.

Gotta love the TDF business ethics.

 

[rejobako]

Fignon was a doper, Merckx was a doper, Coppi was a doper, Anquetil was a doper, Zulle was a doper, Verinque was a doper, Pantani was a doper, et al....

Only the Giro and the Vuelta have actually thrown a leader out of the race.

Gotta love the TDF business ethics.

You seem insistent on throwing out these bold statements without any attribution. In the meantime, hell, if everyone's doping, sounds like there's a level playing field, so what's the problem? I go back to your previous post, where you singled out Armstrong as the "most untested man in sports". Why not just say that cyclists are the most untested athletes in sports and be done with it?