Why does Armstrong provoke such strong pro/anti feelings ?
- Thread starter limerickman
- Start date
Limerickman
Let me translate from the English regarding the quote you provided from my earlier post.
ie" This means that when , or if he wins his 6th Tour de France he will be hailed as the greatest cyclist of all time. Now he is certainly already great, but whatever he does now could he ever be called the greatest? " end quote."
I was expressing the opinion that `even though` he may win his 6th tour this year, he will in no way ever be able to be legitimately referred to as `the greatest`, and the only people who may be tempted to do so would be the non cycling press who are only aware of him because of his unfortunate medical history.
This would have become clear if you had read the rest of the post
ie" Could you ever compare him to Merkyx who while winning his 5 tours was also riding lots of other races and seriosly trying to win them, not just using them as training for something`more important`. Would he also ever consider riding the Giro and the Tour in the same season?. I doubt it.
The rest of us know that the cycling season does not begin and end in July."
I hope this makes things a little clearer lol !!!
Limpet
Originally posted by limerickman
The alleged friendship between Indurain and Armstrong : the publicity for this friendship seems to be only coming from one
side and that's Armstrong side !
I've never read/heard Miguel refer to Armstrong in a personal capacity.
But no, I've never heard Miguel refer to Armstrong as a friend.
So I guess we've got to take Armstrong's word for it that he and Miguel are friends.
........Slow down a bit Limerick! I don't read any of my words insinuating that they are friends. I merely asked you if I was correct regarding his altered pedalling style and help from Indurian in that respect! As for the only public comment I know of from Indurian on Lance was back in '99 when he tipped him to win the TDF.
Originally posted by alicem
........
Alice, I wouldn't worry about it - Limerickman is just too hung up on his anti-Lance agenda to be able to engage his brain into rational gear when discussing the subject.
I mean, just look at some of his comments:
"Please, please can you (and the rest of the Armstrong is Greatest apologists) got to www.cyclinghalloffame.com and read what's there - you will see exactly where your hero is amongst the all time greats."
www.cyclinghalloffame.com rank Lance Armstrong the tenth greatest cyclist of all time. That is obviously a pretty poor standard - to think that in the whole history of cycling he has been bettered by as many as nine whole cyclists just shows up how **** Lance Armstrong really is.
Here's another of his gems:
"And no he won't cycle a Giro or a Vuelta in the same year as trying to cycle a TDF, because he equates (wrongly) that by winning a TDF represents a successful season."
You've got to admit he's got a point. I can't remember any other professional cyclist making such a big deal as Lance Armstrong does about winning such an insignificant race as the poxy old Tour de France. And certainly those that have won it in the past have never gone on record as considering their season a success because of it. Obviously Jan Ullrich only let Lance win last year because he felt sorry for him and of course Jan would rather win only the *really* important races himself.
Yes they did. In fact, I pointed this very thing out on another thread not too long ago. And isn't that interesting?
So why do so many, primarily outside the U.S. paint him so differently than those awards would suggest? And why, when Lance took 2nd on the climb to Hautacam in 2000, were there comments made about what had appeared in the european press insinuating that his 1999 win didn't mean anything because the likes of Pantani and Ullrich weren't there in '99? Lance was asked about "the things in the French press" and his comment was that he'd heard those comments and, "I thought a little bit about that today." Subtle considering he'd just dropped Pantani and Ullrich by 6 minutes on a single stage.
Perhaps the press is playing both sides but leaving the public with a dim view of Armstrong? I don't know. But I do know that the bias in the U.S., and I'm sure there is a strong one, seems opposite to the bias in other areas. Since I don't know Armstrong personally, nor do most others regardless of their opinion of him, there must be some driving force. Either he's the affable person painted by the awards given by the French press or he's the arrogant Texan with a bad attitude, which comes from...??
Either way, things don't quite add up the way they're presented.
Originally posted by Beastt
Yes they did. In fact, I pointed this very thing out on another thread not too long ago. And isn't that interesting?
So why do so many, primarily outside the U.S. paint him so differently than those awards would suggest? And why, when Lance took 2nd on the climb to Hautacam in 2000, were there comments made about what had appeared in the european press insinuating that his 1999 win didn't mean anything because the likes of Pantani and Ullrich weren't there in '99? Lance was asked about "the things in the French press" and his comment was that he'd heard those comments and, "I thought a little bit about that today." Subtle considering he'd just dropped Pantani and Ullrich by 6 minutes on a single stage.
Perhaps the press is playing both sides but leaving the public with a dim view of Armstrong? I don't know. But I do know that the bias in the U.S., and I'm sure there is a strong one, seems opposite to the bias in other areas. Since I don't know Armstrong personally, nor do most others regardless of their opinion of him, there must be some driving force. Either he's the affable person painted by the awards given by the French press or he's the arrogant Texan with a bad attitude, which comes from...??
Either way, things don't quite add up the way they're presented.
I don't think that there's a vast conspiracy against Armstrong.
Granted the image within the USA is on balance different to the image in Europe, for whatever reason.
From the small bit of knowledge that I have of Armstrong, his charity work in the USA is pretty widepsread (?).
In Europe there is virtually no coverage of this work (I don't think that his charity fundraises here in Europe - perhaps someone out there could correct me on this ?).
But I firmly believe that the so-called anti-Armstrong coverage is
not based simply upon the fact that Armstrong is an American who happens to win the TDF : I'd be very surprised if the media was anti-Armstrong because he is American.
Either way, I'm not sure that he's losing sleep as to why there is
such a negative image within certain quarters.
If you look at his ranking on www.cyclinghalloffame. you will see that his ranking of 6980 points is based on the factor of 1200
for gaining 5 TDF victories (5x1200=6000 points)
The remaining 980 points were gained from his world championship win and the other points presumably were picked up somewhere along the line.
His rating in the all time listings is solely dependent upon his performance in the TDF - that was the point that I was articulating.
In my opinion his ranking in the alltime greats isn't very compelling
given his accumulation of the ranking is based on one event for the past 5 years.
Of course, you'd never let the facts at cyclinghalloffame.com
get in the way of your opinion !
And if you take the time to really analyse the numbers, you'll see
some adidtional information.
Take the Tour of Switzerland for example : a very tough race, hasn't been included in the sample of races used to measure all time greatness.
So if you added Merckx's successes and indeed Sean Kelly's successes in this race, Merckx's total would increase and I think
Armstrong would still be behind Kelly in the all time list.
So the dearth in your heros palmares becomes more and more evident.
And one final, final point : if you look at Jan's rating he's quite close to Armstrong, as of now.
I think that it is probable that because Jan is younger, he has a wider palmares, that he might well overtake Armstrong.
If this happens will you then say that Jan is a greater cyclist that
Armstrong ?
You were the one that brought www.cyclinghalloffame.com into the equation. I was merely applying your standards to illustrate the weakness in your own argument.
So, make up your mind: either the stats at cyclinghalloffame.com are meaningful, in which case you accept that Lance Armstrong is the tenth greatest cyclist of all time; or the stats at cyclinghalloffame.com are not meaningful, in which case you shouldn't refer to them in your argument.
Apart from the Tour of Switzerland, there are plenty of other races that aren't featured in the stats at cyclinghalloffame.com - such as the Dauphine Libere, for example.
You're an Ullrich fan ?
I concede then that I shouldn't have referred to you as being an
Armstrong fan (although your advocacy of Armstrong would have
implied that you were an Armstrong fan).
Apologies for making this mistake.
The statistics at www.cyclinghalloffame.com are meaningful.
However, Armstrong's rating at that site is solely reliant on his
TDF victories and his W/C victory.
The question posed was could he win a Giro/Vuelta in the same year as a TDF.
My contention was that Armstrong didn't have the courage (and I would argue the ability) to win two grand tours in the same season.
Thus, if you look at his rating at www.cyclinghalloffame, you will see that the dearth in his palmares
Are you going to answer this question ?
And one final, final point : if you look at Jan's rating he's quite close to Armstrong, as of now. (at www.cyclinghalloffame.com)
I think that it is probable that because Jan is younger, he has a wider palmares, that he might well overtake Armstrong.
If this happens will you then say that Jan is a greater cyclist that
Armstrong ?
Don't be so keen to pigeonhole people as pro-this or anti-that then maybe you won't make this mistake so often.
And try to take off those anti-Armstrong blinkers and then you might be able to appreciate him for what he is: not the greatest cyclist of all time, maybe not even the tenth greatest cyclist of all time, but unquestionably the most single-minded and determined competitor in his sport who thanks to these qualities has dominated his sport's most prestigious event* for the last five years.
You know what? I have read the last few posts and Limerick, you didn't even go as far to answer my statement re L.A and Indurians' supposed friendship.
You seem so focused on 'dissing' anyones admiration of Lance that you are getting yourself caught in a web that you cannot get out of as you are in too deep. As for all your 'knowledge' and back category of racing history, do you think we don't have the same too? Do you think you are on some 'higher turf' opposed to the rest of us? No, you're not.
Your posts are getting vitriolic and appear to be grasping at straws that other posts of yours even contravine. It is time to get off your high horse and face the facts that we ALL love cycling. It has altered our lives and provided inspiration.
So many of us from what I have read have their hero's for whichever reason yet at the same time admire so many other cyclists. If Lance inspired just one person only isn't that enough? Why do you continue to drag everything down and revel in it? Perhaps it is time for you to just open your eyes and Thank God for any inspiration in this dreary world. If it be from L.A, Indurain,Merxx etc.... Why are you apparantly fighting so much instead of simply being pleased that so many of us here are willing to take time out of our everyday lives to bother commenting.
Mutual respect Limerick is what it is about instead of downing and thrashing about wildely for anything you feel can pop any 'bubble'. Is it time to reflect, admire others opinions be they contradictory to your own, stop the anger and the need to fight against all the time. Please, just take some time and whatever seems to have been driving you in your quest then channel it in a better, more productive way instead of all this mud slinging.
A point to start with maybe the sad parting from this world of Marco Pantani. Please, just reflect, contemplate and hopefully find some inner peace.
Alice ***
You seem so focused on 'dissing' anyones admiration of Lance that you are getting yourself caught in a web that you cannot get out of as you are in too deep. As for all your 'knowledge' and back category of racing history, do you think we don't have the same too? Do you think you are on some 'higher turf' opposed to the rest of us? No, you're not.
Your posts are getting vitriolic and appear to be grasping at straws that other posts of yours even contravine. It is time to get off your high horse and face the facts that we ALL love cycling. It has altered our lives and provided inspiration.
So many of us from what I have read have their hero's for whichever reason yet at the same time admire so many other cyclists. If Lance inspired just one person only isn't that enough? Why do you continue to drag everything down and revel in it? Perhaps it is time for you to just open your eyes and Thank God for any inspiration in this dreary world. If it be from L.A, Indurain,Merxx etc.... Why are you apparantly fighting so much instead of simply being pleased that so many of us here are willing to take time out of our everyday lives to bother commenting.
Mutual respect Limerick is what it is about instead of downing and thrashing about wildely for anything you feel can pop any 'bubble'. Is it time to reflect, admire others opinions be they contradictory to your own, stop the anger and the need to fight against all the time. Please, just take some time and whatever seems to have been driving you in your quest then channel it in a better, more productive way instead of all this mud slinging.
A point to start with maybe the sad parting from this world of Marco Pantani. Please, just reflect, contemplate and hopefully find some inner peace.
Alice ***
The thread is discussing pro/anti sentiment re Armstrong.
You alluded to the fact that you are in fact an Ullrich fan.
I simply asked the question that if Ullrich ratings surpassed
Armstrongs rating on the www.cyclinghalloffame.com site,
would you then consider Ullrich to be greater than Armstrong ?
I'm only asking your opinion, DaveK.
If you've read the messages on this thread posted by me, I think that I have been courteous in any of the replies which I have posted.
Unlike some others who have posted messages here, I haven't
attributed false statements against them nor have I resorted to swearing in this Forum.
I respect each view that has been posted here and while I don't agree with the majority of views endorsing Armstrong, I do
feel that there are genuine, legitimate questions as to how he has performed since 1999.
I happen to think that this is an important subject within the sport of cycling and I believe that my argument is constructive
(as I am sure that those who hold opposite view to mine, believe that they too hold constructive views).
But that's as far as this goes, as regards importance.
In the context of everyday life, this is unimportant.
Let's face it, this forum is a discussion and exchange of views.
It's the be-all and end-all of the world if we disagree, is it ?
So yes, enjoy the sport, revel in the achievements of the great ones.
But it's also good to question the veracity of performances as well.
Indeed, the passing of Marco is a very,very black day for our sport.
Similar threads
- Michael Press
- Road Cycling
- sykul doode
- Road Cycling 2 3
- sykul doode
- Road Cycling 2 3
- Diablo Scott
- Road Cycling