Who gave what to whom?

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by Niall Martin, Apr 29, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Niall Martin

    Niall Martin Guest

    Boogerd on a late night chat show here in NL last night was asked about LANCE's apparent antipathy
    towards him at the Amstel and gave an explicit version of what now seems to be the stock answer --
    that it all stems from the Alpe d'Huez stage in last year's TDF.

    USPS believe they let Boogerd win on the Alpe and that they were due some payback. Dekker reneged on
    that agreement.

    Boogerd says that this argument is similar to him going up to Vino after the Amstel and saying
    'actually I let you win because I was the strongest and if I'd launched my attack earlier you
    wouldn't have won, so you owe me' ... i.e. it's nonsense.

    I watched the Alpe d'Huez stage in a bar in France surrounded by incredulous French and Italians and
    delirious Dutch -- great atmosphere, but obviously not the best situation to judge if LANCE was
    playing Father Christmas, and of course I don't have it on video for a cooler appraisal. However,
    from what I remember of that afternoon, I'd go with Boogerd's version.

    Anybody see anything to make them think a deal was struck or that LANCE was being generous?

    Niall
     
    Tags:


  2. On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 07:23:26 GMT, Niall Martin wrote:
    >USPS believe they let Boogerd win on the Alpe

    La Plagne actually.

    >Boogerd says that this argument is similar to him going up to Vino after the Amstel and saying
    >'actually I let you win because I was the strongest and if I'd launched my attack earlier you
    >wouldn't have won, so you owe me'

    Ha! Good one.

    >Anybody see anything to make them think a deal was struck or that LANCE was being generous?

    No, but I do think it was his choice. Not necessarily to be generous, but just to save energy and
    not do more than needed for the GC. I think ever since the Joux-Plane Armstrong is afraid to blow up
    and is content to follow until halfway the last climb. I don't think we will ever see a grand
    mountain stage from him. Besides, Boogerd didn't lose much time in the last 2 kms.

    E.
     
  3. Otto

    Otto Guest

    "Damn it. They were sitting on my wheel a lot," Boogerd told Belgian television. "I went on La
    Redoute, but it didn't force a real selection. Later on it was one breakaway after another, but I
    didn't have any teammates (besides Freire). A good team left and I was with them."

    Boogerd really is a big, toothy ass. When he's not whining, he's crying, and when he's doing
    neither, then he's doing a virenque in front of the TV cameras.

    As I recall, postal did not chase him last year (which they could have done), and at the time
    belgian TV said something to the effect that postal was letting him go, and that rabo would help
    them later on in the race (or maybe it was payback for helping chase a move a few days before?).

    As far as Lnace not winning any grand mountains: what was Siestres, or Alpe d'Huez?

    doe doei

    Ewoud Dronkert <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 07:23:26 GMT, Niall Martin wrote:
    > >USPS believe they let Boogerd win on the Alpe
    >
    > La Plagne actually.
    >
    > >Boogerd says that this argument is similar to him going up to Vino after the Amstel and saying
    > >'actually I let you win because I was the strongest and if I'd launched my attack earlier you
    > >wouldn't have won, so you owe me'
    >
    > Ha! Good one.
    >
    > >Anybody see anything to make them think a deal was struck or that LANCE was being generous?
    >
    > No, but I do think it was his choice. Not necessarily to be generous, but just to save energy and
    > not do more than needed for the GC. I think ever since the Joux-Plane Armstrong is afraid to blow
    > up and is content to follow until halfway the last climb. I don't think we will ever see a grand
    > mountain stage from him. Besides, Boogerd didn't lose much time in the last 2 kms.
    >
    > E.
     
  4. Hyllus

    Hyllus Guest

    The fact that Armstrong feels the need to start calling in favors shows me that he is starting to
    doubt his own abilities.

    I think that we are starting to see the beginning of the end.

    Armstrong will be lucky to win 5 tours, getting his 5th either this year or next. 6 will not happen.

    Ewoud Dronkert <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 07:23:26 GMT, Niall Martin wrote:
    > >USPS believe they let Boogerd win on the Alpe
    >
    > La Plagne actually.
    >
    > >Boogerd says that this argument is similar to him going up to Vino after the Amstel and saying
    > >'actually I let you win because I was the strongest and if I'd launched my attack earlier you
    > >wouldn't have won, so you owe me'
    >
    > Ha! Good one.
    >
    > >Anybody see anything to make them think a deal was struck or that LANCE was being generous?
    >
    > No, but I do think it was his choice. Not necessarily to be generous, but just to save energy and
    > not do more than needed for the GC. I think ever since the Joux-Plane Armstrong is afraid to blow
    > up and is content to follow until halfway the last climb. I don't think we will ever see a grand
    > mountain stage from him. Besides, Boogerd didn't lose much time in the last 2 kms.
    >
    > E.
     
  5. In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (otto) wrote:

    > As far as Lnace not winning any grand mountains: what was Siestres, or Alpe d'Huez?

    We will never see Lance go on a long attack in the mountains, like Virenque, Jalabert, Chiappucci,
    etc. have done ...

    --
    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
     
  6. Niall Martin

    Niall Martin Guest

    On 29 Apr 2003 05:27:58 -0700, [email protected] (otto) wrote:

    >"Damn it. They were sitting on my wheel a lot," Boogerd told Belgian television. "I went on La
    >Redoute, but it didn't force a real selection. Later on it was one breakaway after another, but I
    >didn't have any teammates (besides Freire). A good team left and I was with them."

    Yes I heard that too. Last night however the chat show hosts, Barend and Van Dorp, were trying to
    get him to lay into his team and Freire in particular for not giving him the support he deserves but
    Boogerd was having none of it -- saying that Freire was with him to 7km from the finish at LBL and
    his team delivered him as fresh as a daisy to the finale of Amstel.

    When one of the other guests, Jan Mulder, said that everybody he knew thought there was nothing much
    wrong with Rabo, but thought that, while Boogerd was a good rider he just didn't have what it takes
    to win a major classic, Boogerd said he thought Mulder was probably right, certainly the fault lay
    with him rather than his team. No motivation issue: "Ik was leeg".

    >Boogerd really is a big, toothy ass. When he's not whining, he's crying, and when he's doing
    >neither, then he's doing a virenque in front of the TV cameras.

    >As I recall, postal did not chase him last year (which they could have done), and at the time
    >belgian TV said something to the effect that postal was letting him go, and that rabo would help
    >them later on in the race (or maybe it was payback for helping chase a move a few days before?).

    Great though Belgian TV is, and incomparably better than the Dutch, it's not infallible. After all,
    they couldn't believe that LANCE hadn't won LBL on Saturday and had great difficulty belivieving
    that the break wasn't going to be brought back in the Fleche on Weds.

    There's also a fair degree of Bruyneelitis in Belgian commentary coupled with some familiar
    Flemish-Dutch chauvinsim, so the word of Wuyts alone doesn't entirely convince me of the reality of
    the USPS scenario.

    >
    >As far as Lnace not winning any grand mountains: what was Siestres, or Alpe d'Huez?

    I don't know. As I say, my viewing of the second half of last yr's tour was patchy and inebriated
    (to the extent of mistaking Alpe d'Huez for La Plagne), but I take it Ewoud means that LANCE only
    attacks on the last climb in order to minimize the risk of blowing up a, la Joux-Plane. Did either
    of these two wins involve attacking before the last climb?

    groetjes,

    Niall
     
  7. On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 13:28:09 GMT, Steven L. Sheffield wrote:
    >We will never see Lance go on a long attack in the mountains, like Virenque, Jalabert, Chiappucci,
    >etc. have done ...

    That's what I meant. Which Tour winners did long mountain breakaways? Merckx, Coppi, Bahamontes,
    Ocaña no doubt. The 20th century champions we will not see again.
     
  8. "Niall Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    >
    > Boogerd on a late night chat show here in NL last night was asked about LANCE's apparent antipathy
    > towards him at the Amstel and gave an explicit version of what now seems to be the stock answer --
    > that it all stems from the Alpe d'Huez stage in last year's TDF.
    >
    > USPS believe they let Boogerd win on the Alpe and that they were due some payback. Dekker reneged
    > on that agreement.
    >

    Has anyone from USPS said that they let Boogerd win? It's more likely that USPS did Rabobank a favor
    by not chasing so that Levi could stay in the top ten on GC - Sastre finished with Armstrong and
    Basso was right behind Leipheimer. If Levi cracks in the chase, he could have lost major time to
    those chasing him.

    - T
     
  9. "Hyllus" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > The fact that Armstrong feels the need to start calling in favors shows me that he is starting to
    > doubt his own abilities.
    >
    > I think that we are starting to see the beginning of the end.
    >
    > Armstrong will be lucky to win 5 tours, getting his 5th either this year or next. 6 will
    > not happen.
    >

    Lucky? Then why is he the favorite? If anyone but Armstrong wins this year, they will most likely be
    the lucky one.

    -T
     
  10. In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...

    >We will never see Lance go on a long attack in the mountains, like Virenque, Jalabert, Chiappucci,
    >etc. have done ...

    Towards the end of his career we might see that.
    -----------------
    Alex __O _-\<,_ (_)/ (_)
     
  11. Niall Martin <[email protected]> schreef in berichtnieuws [email protected]
    > On 29 Apr 2003 05:27:58 -0700, [email protected] (otto) wrote:
    ...
    > When one of the other guests, Jan Mulder, said that everybody he knew thought there was nothing
    > much wrong with Rabo, but thought that, while Boogerd was a good rider he just didn't have what it
    > takes to win a major classic, Boogerd said he thought Mulder was probably right, certainly the
    > fault lay with him rather than his team. No motivation issue: "Ik was leeg".

    If Barend & Van Dorp is usenet, Jan Mulder is a troll. He was probably really surprised that someone
    agreed with him.

    > Great though Belgian TV is, and incomparably better than the Dutch, it's not infallible. After
    > all, they couldn't believe that LANCE hadn't won LBL on Saturday and had great difficulty
    > belivieving that the break wasn't going to be brought back in the Fleche on Weds.
    >
    > There's also a fair degree of Bruyneelitis in Belgian commentary coupled with some familiar
    > Flemish-Dutch chauvinsim, so the word of Wuyts alone doesn't entirely convince me of the reality
    > of the USPS scenario.

    The Bruyneelitis is quite logical - who wouldn't be proud of such a succesful coach? Even
    Bankgiroloterij is called 'Team Capiot' by Wuyts and Redant. But I watched the La Plagne stage on
    VRT and do not recall such critical remarks towards Boogerd.

    I think it is ludicrous to believe that Lance actually wanted Boogerd to win that stage. US Postal
    set the pace for the lead group on the flat part before La Plagne, so they did chase Boogerd. And
    Armstrong surely tried to win that stage, especially given the fact that for a long time it looked
    as if Boogerd was going to be caught. Only after Boogerd apparently accellerated again did Armstrong
    decide it was time to escape. If Boogerd hadn't regained some strength (and it seemed as if he
    wouldn't), he would have lost.

    >...

    Jonathan.
     
  12. Ewoud Dronkert <[email protected]> schreef in berichtnieuws
    [email protected]
    > On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 13:28:09 GMT, Steven L. Sheffield wrote:
    > >We will never see Lance go on a long attack in the mountains, like Virenque, Jalabert,
    > >Chiappucci, etc. have done ...
    >
    > That's what I meant. Which Tour winners did long mountain breakaways? Merckx, Coppi, Bahamontes,
    > Ocaña no doubt. The 20th century champions we will not see again.

    Lesser gods also tried it. Thevenet in a stage to La Mongie (I think), and Pantani tried it in the
    infamous Joux Plane stage. And when did Pantani attack in the stage to Les Deux Alpes?
     
  13. Otto

    Otto Guest

    [email protected] (Niall Martin) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > On 29 Apr 2003 05:27:58 -0700, [email protected] (otto) wrote:
    >
    > >"Damn it. They were sitting on my wheel a lot," Boogerd told Belgian television. "I went on La
    > >Redoute, but it didn't force a real selection. Later on it was one breakaway after another, but I
    > >didn't have any teammates (besides Freire). A good team left and I was with them."
    >
    > Yes I heard that too. Last night however the chat show hosts, Barend and Van Dorp, were trying to
    > get him to lay into his team and Freire in particular for not giving him the support he deserves
    > but Boogerd was having none of it -- saying that Freire was with him to 7km from the finish at LBL
    > and his team delivered him as fresh as a daisy to the finale of Amstel.

    Too bad i missed that. B and v D are usually OK. It surprises me that they'd try and get him to
    criticize rabo. Anyway, Boogerd is an idiot, and an excruciating one at that. Why can't he break his
    leg, or hip, or collar bone, or whatever Dekker did last year?

    > When one of the other guests, Jan Mulder, said that everybody he knew thought there was nothing
    > much wrong with Rabo, but thought that, while Boogerd was a good rider he just didn't have what it
    > takes to win a major classic, Boogerd said he thought Mulder was probably right, certainly the
    > fault lay with him rather than his team. No motivation issue: "Ik was leeg".

    Excuses, excuses. BTW - Mulder grates on my nerves. Never liked the guy, too much of a know it all.

    > >Boogerd really is a big, toothy ass. When he's not whining, he's crying, and when he's doing
    > >neither, then he's doing a virenque in front of the TV cameras.
    >
    > >As I recall, postal did not chase him last year (which they could have done), and at the time
    > >belgian TV said something to the effect that postal was letting him go, and that rabo would help
    > >them later on in the race (or maybe it was payback for helping chase a move a few days before?).
    >
    > Great though Belgian TV is, and incomparably better than the Dutch, it's not infallible. After
    > all, they couldn't believe that LANCE hadn't won LBL on Saturday and had great difficulty
    > belivieving that the break wasn't going to be brought back in the Fleche on Weds.

    I'll more or less agree with that. Dutch coverage bores me to tears. They're way to Boogerd centric
    (he's an Ok racer, but nothing special. If he was italian or spanish he'd be virtually anoymous.
    It's just dutch pride, or attempts to bolster it.

    > There's also a fair degree of Bruyneelitis in Belgian commentary coupled with some familiar
    > Flemish-Dutch chauvinsim, so the word of Wuyts alone doesn't entirely convince me of the reality
    > of the USPS scenario.

    How about dutch TV come tour time. Mart Smeets is always trying to get lance to spew out his
    basic dutch:

    Smeets: so lance you speak dutch, don't you? Lance: uhh . . . leuken neuken in de keuken!
    > >
    > >As far as Lnace not winning any grand mountains: what was Siestres, or Alpe d'Huez?
    >
    > I don't know. As I say, my viewing of the second half of last yr's tour was patchy and inebriated
    > (to the extent of mistaking Alpe d'Huez for La Plagne), but I take it Ewoud means that LANCE only
    > attacks on the last climb in order to minimize the risk of blowing up a, la Joux-Plane. Did either
    > of these two wins involve attacking before the last climb?

    I think Edwoud covered that, and I'll have to agree. I don't think we'll see a tour winner pull off
    those kind of moves in the foreseeable future.

    groetjes terug

    Otto
    > groetjes,
    >
    > Niall
     
  14. Bart

    Bart Guest

    Belgian TV is good just because there is so much. Wuyts is the typical analyst who seeks hierarchy
    and other patterns in an overdone way. And he goes psychological too much, blowing up the drama af
    scenario turns. I wouldn't call him a connaisseur. And the Museeuw etc. bias can be irritating.

    Precessor Vanlombeek was worse in all aspects still.
     
  15. On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 19:27:54 GMT, Bart wrote:
    >Wuyts is the typical analyst who seeks hierarchy and other patterns in an overdone way. And he goes
    >psychological too much, blowing up the drama af scenario turns. I wouldn't call him a connaisseur.
    >And the Museeuw etc. bias can be irritating.
    >
    >Precessor Vanlombeek was worse in all aspects still.

    So you like Uytterhoeven? I do/did anyway.

    (no, as a commentator).
     
  16. Tom Schulenburg <[email protected]> schreef in berichtnieuws
    [email protected]
    >
    > "Niall Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > >
    > > Boogerd on a late night chat show here in NL last night was asked about LANCE's apparent
    > > antipathy towards him at the Amstel and gave an explicit version of what now seems to be the
    > > stock answer -- that it all stems from the Alpe d'Huez stage in last year's TDF.
    > >
    > > USPS believe they let Boogerd win on the Alpe and that they were due some payback. Dekker
    > > reneged on that agreement.
    > >
    >
    > Has anyone from USPS said that they let Boogerd win? It's more likely
    that
    > USPS did Rabobank a favor by not chasing so that Levi could stay in the
    top
    > ten on GC - Sastre finished with Armstrong and Basso was right behind Leipheimer. If Levi cracks
    > in the chase, he could have lost major time to those chasing him.
    >
    > - T

    US Postal did chase. Up to La Plagne, the chase group was led by US Postal riders and in the final
    kms, Armstrong chased Boogerd. I don't see where the myth that US Postal wasn't chasing comes from.
     
  17. On 29 Apr 2003 12:08:30 -0700, [email protected] (Greg Hall) wrote:

    >[email protected] (Tom Paterson) wrote in message
    >news:<[email protected]>...
    >> What year was that where Hinault's long mountain attack was caught by Alexi Grewal? --Tom
    >> Paterson
    >
    >I was thinking of Hinault as well back in 1996

    You mean 1986? In 1996 Hinault was yellow jersey zip manager and Riis was winning.

    regards Anders
     
  18. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    "Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > In article <c3559fe7.0304290427.7b84fcc[email protected]>, [email protected] (otto) wrote:
    >
    > > As far as Lnace not winning any grand mountains: what was Siestres, or Alpe d'Huez?
    >
    > We will never see Lance go on a long attack in the mountains, like Virenque, Jalabert, Chiappucci,
    > etc. have done ...

    We would never have seen those men go if they were leading the Tour.

    Come on, the only person who would attack when they were in the lead or were the top choice was
    Eddy. No one else is going to have that much ego.
     
  19. Bart <[email protected]> schreef in berichtnieuws
    [email protected]
    > Belgian TV is good just because there is so much. Wuyts is the typical analyst who seeks hierarchy
    > and other patterns in an overdone way. And he goes psychological too much, blowing up the drama af
    > scenario turns. I wouldn't call him a connaisseur. And the Museeuw etc.
    bias
    > can be irritating.

    He's better than Mart Smeets, whose attempts at literary drama (Smeetsiaans: "Dit is afzien," "Nu
    komt de man met de hamer," "Hier rijdt een legende," "Die moet eraf, die moet eraf...")become very
    irritating after a short while. Wuyts, in spite of his endless talking, is more to the point, and
    simply knows more about cycling. Smeets used to be better; he has more trouble recognizing riders
    than he used to. With only two commentaries to choose from (I don't get Eurosport) the choice is
    an easy one.
     
  20. > Boogerd really is a big, toothy ass. When he's not whining, he's crying, and when he's doing
    > neither, then he's doing a virenque in front of the TV cameras.

    Yuck! That's very unfair to one of the most attractive riders in the peloton. He's not only riding
    aggresively, he's also speaking out unlike most of his colleagues who have hardly anything sensible
    to say or just don't show their emotions.

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