# Well knock me down with a feather...



## wafflycat (28 Jul 2009)

... so they don't get on. Who'd have thought it! 

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/war-of-words-erupts-between-contador-armstrong

The Texan doesn't like anyone doing better than him and certainly not someone from the same team!


----------



## Hont (28 Jul 2009)

Always difficult to properly assess comments that have been translated from their original language, but Armstrong's show such a lack of class. He should have been delighted with third, but appears to be merely churlish.


----------



## Chuffy (28 Jul 2009)

Hont said:


> Always difficult to properly assess comments that have been translated from their original language, but Armstrong's show such a lack of class. He should have been delighted with third, but appears to be merely churlish.


Dropping into the team and expecting Bertie to move over and accept, at the very least, co-leadership was an act of monumental arrogance. Bertie was hardly a promising youngster who needed to be shown the ropes. He's already won a greater spread of titles than LA ever dreamed of. Bryuneel deserves a spanking too, it's not just Armstrong.


----------



## Chuffy (28 Jul 2009)

User3094 said:


> Well, lets look at the facts shall we....
> 
> 
> 1) LA has been an impeccable 'team player' for the past 2 weeks +, even though his own chances of personal glory were far from over.
> ...


Nope. His attitude from the start was shabby. It took Bertie kicking his arse, _against team orders_ to show him who the boss was. A triple GT winner starting the race as the overwhelming favourite shouldn't be forced into doing that just to show his own team who they should be working for. All Armstrong did was bow to the inevitable, he couldn't keep up.


----------



## andy_wrx (28 Jul 2009)

Like Armstrong said : It's not about the bike, it's about ME !

Who or what is the Astana team though ?
- formed from the ashes of Liberty Seguros/Wurth with Kazakh money to support Vino, with additional intention of developing other Kazakh riders
- Vino promptly gets done for doping and suspended and the team nearly collapses again
- meanwhile Discovery have decided they won't sponsor any more due to to the bad publicity any drug allegations would cause, and Bruyneel and Armstrong can't find any other sponsor who will touch them, so Bruyneel comes-over and takes over running of Astana, bringing Alberto and lots of other Disco/ex-Postal riders, DS's, staff
- the Tour won't have them so Alberto wins the Giro and Vuelta with them, is undisputed as team leader and GC contender
- then Armstrong decides he's going to un-retire, because he thinks it's all very easy stuff, no great competition form riders like Ullrich that he had to face in his days, so reckons he can come back and 'kick ass'
- so he parachutes back into the team, expecting to instantly be head honcho again, and since Bruyneel is running the show and most of the riders and staff are ex-Disco and Postal, they drop back into their old roles of supporting him
- but Alberto has other ideas and does something Lance has never had to face before : actually beats him rather than being a dutiful domestique, grateful just to be given the odd stage win
- meanwhile the Kazakhs have been getting a bit disgruntled, wondering why they were paying their Kazakh money when there are no Kazakhs actually riding on the team, and whilst there is publicity it's all about Armstrong and nothing for Kazakhstan
- Vino's ban has now ended and he's coming back, the sponsors are going to make Bruyneel run him, so Armstrong and Bruyneel are off to set-up a new team

Interesting bit of soap opera...


----------



## Panter (28 Jul 2009)

It's appaling isn't it. A Seven times Tour winner and cancer survivor having expectations higher than serving someone else.
Tut tut, who'd have thought.


----------



## simon_brooke (28 Jul 2009)

User3094 said:


> Well, lets look at the facts shall we....
> 
> 
> 1) LA has been an impeccable 'team player' for the past 2 weeks +, even though his own chances of personal glory were far from over.



I do presume you're being sarcastic.

In the past three weeks

(1) How many bottles of water have you seen Bertie hand Lance (I've seen at least three)
(2) How many bottles of water have you seen Lance hand Contador (none)

In the past three weeks, how often have you seen Bertie riding on his own without another Astana rider in support? Ditto Lance?

Face it: Lance not only expected Bertie to domestique for him (even when Bertie was in yellow) but he also hoovered up all Bertie's domestiques so Bertie was more or less unsupported most of the time.


----------



## Will1985 (28 Jul 2009)

Loving the tweets and re-tweets. There are plenty of people who agree that Contador is not a team man and lacks the tactical nous. In fact, he is very much like Armstrong in his youth when he rode with power instead of his head. He isn't developing the Contadope nickname for nothing (dual meaning of course....the dopey side which we can see at the moment).


----------



## Will1985 (28 Jul 2009)

simon_brooke said:


> (1) How many bottles of water have you seen Bertie hand Lance (I've seen at least three)
> (2) How many bottles of water have you seen Lance hand Contador (none)


I saw Armstrong give Contador at least 2 bottles. I presume you weren't doing any work and just watching the channel surfing/red button feed from lunchtime (like me most of the time)?


----------



## andy_wrx (28 Jul 2009)

Panter said:


> It's appaling isn't it. A Seven times Tour winner and cancer survivor having expectations higher than serving someone else.
> Tut tut, who'd have thought.



The Seven times Tour winner I can understand, but I don't see any relevance of being a cancer survivor to being team leader ?


----------



## Hont (28 Jul 2009)

Not sure how relevant bottle passing is, as they were both team leaders neither would be expected to fetch bottles for the other.

We really do not know what went on behind closed doors, but in public until the tour was over Bertie was very non-comittal and said almost nothing if he could. Armstrong on the other hand, criticised both the attack on Arcalis and the attack which saw Kloden dropped, as did Levi. For a team which saw them get 1st, third and sixth you think they'd be happier wouldn't you?

Outside of the battle by media I don't think there was much in the way of teamwork from any of the big names at Astana, except Klöden, who - after getting dropped on Ventoux - set the pace when he got back on, rather than try and preserve his 5th place. 

Fundamentally I think the problem was Armstrong is just not used to anything other than a team built totally around him. What's funny is that the press have spent almost a year forecasting this type of thing, only for Astana to deny any problem.


----------



## Hont (28 Jul 2009)

andy_wrx said:


> The Seven times Tour winner I can understand, but I don't see any relevance of being a cancer survivor to being team leader ?



Especially given Contador's medical history. I can't imagine Brunyeel deciding team leadership based on Chemotherapy v Brain surgery.


----------



## Panter (28 Jul 2009)

andy_wrx said:


> The Seven times Tour winner I can understand, but I don't see any relevance of being a cancer survivor to being team leader ?



It probably doesn't, sorry.

Anyway, I'm backing out of this now, I get immensley irritated by all the hater comments when LA's name pops up on a forum.


----------



## Chuffy (28 Jul 2009)

Hont said:


> Especially given Contador's medical history. I can't imagine Brunyeel deciding team leadership based on Chemotherapy v Brain surgery.


Damn, had this all typed out to post and got interrupted by work and lunch...



Panter said:


> It's appaling isn't it. A Seven times Tour winner and cancer survivor having expectations higher than serving someone else.
> Tut tut, who'd have thought.


Does surviving cancer beat surviving a brain haemorrage? Perhaps Bertie and Lance should play Serious Disease Top Trumps instead of bothering to ride?
But seriously, what does surviving cancer have to do with the team situation?


----------



## Will1985 (28 Jul 2009)

It doesn't. The cancer/brain haemorrhage overcoming is just part of the media sensationalism which adds something to a good story.

On the other hand there is a team where selection is partly based on health situation: Team Type 1.


----------



## Chuffy (28 Jul 2009)

Will1985 said:


> It doesn't. The cancer/brain haemorrhage overcoming is just part of the media sensationalism which adds something to a good story.


In addition there is the way that fans/admirers of Team LA tend to use the 'but he survived cancer!' line as a special trump card that deflects any criticism. Panter's post (retraction duly noted) is a great example. 



> On the other hand there is a team where selection is partly based on health situation: Team Type 1.


Ah. Not Team Type O then...


----------



## andy_wrx (28 Jul 2009)

Hont said:


> What's funny is that the press have spent almost a year forecasting this type of thing, only for Astana to deny any problem.



What also amused me was the ITV4 programmes, where Gary Inmlach and Matt Rendell would comment on the politics, undercurrents and infighting, would get Chris Boardman on to comment about them...

...whereas the Paul & Phil commentary duo would blithely ignore it all and see just how many times in 30 minutes they could cram-in mentions of how strong Lance Armstrong was looking !


----------



## trustysteed (28 Jul 2009)

Chuffy said:


> He's already won a greater spread of titles than LA ever dreamed of.



I'm pretty sure that was because Armstrong *chose* to concentrate on the TDF. If he'd have ridden the Giro or Vuelta instead of the TDF some of the years, he probably would have won those as well but the TDF is the pinnacle of cycling so that was his priority.


----------



## Crackle (28 Jul 2009)

So any other 'nearly died' winners of the Tour or winners with serious handicaps, excluding being French, which is the same thing.

Lemond, Armstrong, Contador ....... ?


----------



## Chuffy (28 Jul 2009)

trustysteed said:


> I'm pretty sure that was because Armstrong *chose* to concentrate on the TDF. If he'd have ridden the Giro or Vuelta instead of the TDF some of the years, he probably would have won those as well but the TDF is the pinnacle of cycling so that was his priority.


Shall we open the up the 'who is the greatest cyclist of all time' can'o'worms? 

Clue - it isn't St Lance, by a very long way...


----------



## Chuffy (28 Jul 2009)

Crackle said:


> So any other 'nearly died' winners of the Tour or winners with serious handicaps, excluding being French, which is the same thing.
> 
> Lemond, Armstrong, Contador ....... ?


Eddie Merckx. Born with only one leg and had a lung replaced by a Netto carrier bag when he was 3 months old. 

Not a lot of people know that.


----------



## trustysteed (28 Jul 2009)

Chuffy said:


> Shall we open the up the 'who is the greatest cyclist of all time' can'o'worms?
> 
> Clue - it isn't St Lance, by a very long way...



There is no 'greatest cyclist'. There's only anybody's own personal opinion about who they admire the most. Just because someone else tells me a certain person is the greatest cyclist, doesn't mean it's true.

For me, it is Lance but then maybe that's because I got into the cycling thing about 10 years ago just when he was starting his TDF domination. I'm sure for other people, the greatest cyclist is the one they watched during their own era in previous decades.

Some people might say Schumacher was the greatest F1 driver of all time as he won the most grand prix's and championships, accrued the most points, pole positions etc. But for me the best driver ever was Ayrton Senna. It's all personal opinion.

So saying it isn't Lance because you think it's someone else is only really relevant to you.


----------



## beancounter (28 Jul 2009)

trustysteed said:


> There is no 'greatest cyclist'. There's only anybody's own personal opinion about who they admire the most.



Obviously everyone has an opinion and everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

However, Merckx was _demonstrably_ the greatest cyclist ever.

Do some research.

bc


----------



## Chuffy (28 Jul 2009)

trustysteed said:


> There is no 'greatest cyclist'. There's only anybody's own personal opinion about who they admire the most. Just because someone else tells me a certain person is the greatest cyclist, doesn't mean it's true.
> 
> For me, it is Lance but then maybe that's because I got into the cycling thing about 10 years ago just when he was starting his TDF domination. I'm sure for other people, the greatest cyclist is the one they watched during their own era in previous decades.
> 
> ...


Senna didn't have as long a career as that cheating Kraut ba*stard (as he's known in these parts). Who knows what he would have won if he'd lived? Likewise Fausto Coppi didn't get to race the Tour for several years because of the war. Who knows how many he would have won? Even Merckx was humbled when he learned how Coppi's career had been handicapped. If Merckx had focussed on the Tour exclusively he'd have won ten (cf Bernard Hinault iirc). You say it's just opinion, I say it's more than that. it's breadth and depth of victories and LA comes nowhere near the true greats. Incidentally, my interest started while LA was about to start preparing for his 5th Tour victory. Cycling fans are a historically minded bunch. We're not like football fans who latch on to whoever happens to be top at the moment.


----------



## simon_brooke (28 Jul 2009)

User3143 said:


> ''...there's no 'I' in team''



Yes, I thought that was wonderfully and humorously ironic, coming from Lance.


----------



## trustysteed (28 Jul 2009)

beancounter said:


> Do some research.
> 
> bc



yes, i know merckx won all sorts of races but he's still only the greatest cyclist in your personal opinion based on criteria that you've decided for yourself. 

i have my personal sporting idols who i think are the greatest for myself for my own reasons.

who's the greatest tennis player ever? laver, borg, or federer? there's arguments for each, but it will still come down to each person's personal view on what makes the greatest sports person in their discipline.


----------



## Crackle (28 Jul 2009)

No we don't. We come to a consensus. By most peoples consensus, Merkcx was the best, Armstrong some way down.


----------



## Crackle (28 Jul 2009)

Most what, Tour De France's, Grand Tours, Classics, all of them plus others?


----------



## Chuffy (28 Jul 2009)

Crackle said:


> Most what, Tour De France's, Grand Tours, Classics, all of them plus others?


Only the Tour counts. After all, Lance barely mentions the others in his books.


----------



## Crackle (28 Jul 2009)

User3094 said:


> Would LA be the best ever TdF rider then?



Certainly the most succesful. I think there are a number of individual victories which stand out above his but you can't argue with 7 wins in a row.


----------



## Crackle (28 Jul 2009)

User3094 said:


> Would I be right in thinking the TdF is the worlds most recognised cycle race?




Oh I wondered where you were going right from the start. So is Wimbledon the worlds most recognised tennis tournament?


----------



## girofan (28 Jul 2009)

andy_wrx said:


> What also amused me was the ITV4 programmes, where Gary Inmlach and Matt Rendell would comment on the politics, undercurrents and infighting, would get Chris Boardman on to comment about them...
> 
> ...whereas the Paul & Phil commentary duo would blithely ignore it all and see just how many times in 30 minutes they could cram-in mentions of how strong Lance Armstrong was looking !



Paul & Phil get their bread & butter from the States, they're not going to bite the hand that feeds them!
Irony seems to pass them by as it does the majority of the American media.


----------



## borsuk (28 Jul 2009)

Chuffy said:


> Senna didn't have as long a career as that cheating Kraut ba*stard (as he's known in these parts). Who knows what he would have won if he'd lived? Likewise Fausto Coppi didn't get to race the Tour for several years because of the war. Who knows how many he would have won? Even Merckx was humbled when he learned how Coppi's career had been handicapped. If Merckx had focussed on the Tour exclusively he'd have won ten (cf Bernard Hinault iirc). You say it's just opinion, I say it's more than that. it's breadth and depth of victories and LA comes nowhere near the true greats. Incidentally, my interest started while LA was about to start preparing for his 5th Tour victory. Cycling fans are a historically minded bunch. *We're not like football fans who latch on to whoever happens to be top at the moment.*



shows how little you know about football culture.


agree with the rest, though.


----------



## Chuffy (28 Jul 2009)

Crackle said:


> Oh I wondered where you were going right from the start. So is Wimbledon the worlds most recognised tennis tournament?


I sometimes get the impression that people think of the Tour as being a bit like conkers. Win a Tour and you're automatically better than all the winners of all the other races.


----------



## Chuffy (28 Jul 2009)

borsuk said:


> shows how little you know about football culture.


So all those kids who I was at school* with in the late 70's and early 80's just _happened_ to pick Liverpool as their team through sheer chance? 
And all those 90's Manchester United fans. Perhaps they all have deep and ancient family history with the industrial North-West?
Come on, loads of footie fans are just glory hunting b'stards who want to side with the winners.





* - near Bournemouth.


----------



## Molecule Man (28 Jul 2009)

Back to the serious illness/injury top trumps.
Eddy Merckx had that famous crash after his first TdF victory, severely injuring his back, so that he was in severe pain for much of his subsequent career. And I am sure I have read something about him having surgery on his perineum before a race (TdF I think), and the wound opened and he was bleeding for most of the race.
Regarding who has been the greatest ever, Merckx wins on every possible measure, surely? His results are simply astounding. Even his TdF record alone possibly trumps Armstrong, if you consider his wins in the points and mountains competitions, and his stage win record.


----------



## dan_bo (28 Jul 2009)

Molecule Man said:


> Back to the serious illness/injury top trumps.
> Eddy Merckx had that famous crash after his first TdF victory, severely injuring his back, so that he was in severe pain for much of his subsequent career. And I am sure I have read something about him having surgery on his *perineum* before a race (TdF I think), and the wound opened and he was bleeding for most of the race.
> Regarding who has been the greatest ever, Merckx wins on every possible measure, surely? His results are simply astounding. Even his TdF record alone possibly trumps Armstrong, if you consider his wins in the points and mountains competitions, and his stage win record.



Is that the bit between your front and back bums? ow.


----------



## Molecule Man (28 Jul 2009)

dan_bo said:


> Is that the bit between your front and back bums? ow.



Yes, the article I read mentions his shorts being soaked with blood at the end of every stage, if I remember right.


----------



## Molecule Man (28 Jul 2009)

Any other tennis fans here?
It may be a close call, but I reckon that the arguments in tennis forums, mainly between Federer fans (Fedtards) and Nadal fans (Rafatards) are even more bad-tempered than Lance Armstrong forum threads.
Then there's all the racist shoot spouted about the Williams sisters.
So I reckon tennis wins internet forum mentalist top trumps.

Sorry, what was this thread about? I got distracted.


----------



## Noodley (28 Jul 2009)

This is almost as much fun as seeing Contador and Armstrong hitting each other with handbags


----------



## Molecule Man (28 Jul 2009)

Oh yes, I remember now. 
Personally, I don't think either of them comes out of this looking good. And perhaps Johan Bruyneel comes out of it looking even worse.
I pity the public relations team at Team Astana?


----------



## aJohnson (28 Jul 2009)

Noodley said:


> This is almost as much fun as seeing Contador and Armstrong hitting each other with handbags



Instead, it's seeing Contador and Armstrong hitting each other with metaphorical handbags.


----------



## Panter (28 Jul 2009)

User3094 said:


> I'm not a big fan, but I think so, yes.
> 
> Now back to the TdF?



I think you've got them............


----------



## Chuffy (28 Jul 2009)

Panter said:


> I think you've got them............


I thought you'd retired from this thread? Jeez even St Lance had the decency to stay away for three years before he made his comeback. You haven't even been gone three minutes.


----------



## Chuffy (28 Jul 2009)

Noodley said:


> This is almost as much fun as seeing Contador and Armstrong hitting each other with handbags


It doesn't take much, does it?


----------



## zaid (28 Jul 2009)

Like or hate Armstrong or Contador, the TDF would have been a poorer spectacle without them both taking part. 

I don't know about anyone else here but I totaly enjoyed watching this Tour more than any of the Tours in recent years.


----------



## Panter (28 Jul 2009)

Chuffy said:


> I thought you'd retired from this thread? Jeez even St Lance had the decency to stay away for three years before he made his comeback. You haven't even been gone three minutes.



It's all relative, see .

Anyway I'm back now and I'm here to WIN


----------



## PD 2009 (28 Jul 2009)

So I take it Bertie isn't going to Radio Shack next year then?


----------



## Chuffy (28 Jul 2009)

Panter said:


> It's all relative, see .
> 
> Anyway I'm back now and I'm here to WIN


No, you get to come third behind me and Noodley.
















....until we all get busted for injecting monkey glands and Wiggy wins the Tour!


----------



## Panter (28 Jul 2009)

Chuffy said:


> No, you get to come third behind me and Noodley.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



PMSL


----------



## fossyant (28 Jul 2009)

The Tour was good...why...Wiggy and Cav............ come one.......... and the brothers......

I suspect Phil and Paul were commentating for an American channel - certainly some live internet feeds on the first few days were identical to what ITV4 had...... - i.e. ITV 4 just bought coverage, with the 'local' stuff being Garry..... and the lack of Chris....OK I know he had bike launches to do...but it was not much for him.......

Lance who..........his bike looks rubbish anyway.............


----------



## andrew_s (29 Jul 2009)

fossyant said:


> I suspect Phil and Paul were commentating for an American channel - certainly some live internet feeds on the first few days were identical to what ITV4 had.


They seemed to be doing all the English language commentary except for Eurosport - Versus in the US, ITV4 in the UK, SBS in Australia, Supersport in South Africa (at least).
Some of the US fora seemed to think it was in their contact that they had to mention Lance every 30 seconds .


----------



## andy_wrx (29 Jul 2009)

I loved it when they went from saying how strong Lance looked, to just a few seconds later saying how Frank Schleck was having a bad day
- since Lance and Frank were climbing together, this didn't make any sense unless they were really saying that Frank is a far better rider than Lance...


But when they started saying what a shame it was that Lance hadn't got the yellow jersey, when Cancellara held onto it by 0.22sec, how it would have been so good to see Lance in yellow in his comeback tour, being such a great champion, etc...
That was almost enough to make me gag.


----------



## GilesM (29 Jul 2009)

Whatever you think about Bertie and Lance, it is obvious that Bertie screwed up big time when he dropped Kloden, and towed team Andy and Frank away from him, if he hadn't done that Astana may have got 1,2,3 in Paris, it may have just been doumb or it might be for other reasons, but whatever the reason, it was not impressive.


----------



## Chuffy (29 Jul 2009)

GilesM said:


> Whatever you think about Bertie and Lance, it is obvious that Bertie screwed up big time when he dropped Kloden, and towed team Andy and Frank away from him, if he hadn't done that Astana may have got 1,2,3 in Paris, it may have just been doumb or it might be for other reasons, but whatever the reason, it was not impressive.


Maybe after the way he was treated by the management he didn't feel that he owed them anything and was making a point?


----------



## Noodley (29 Jul 2009)

andy_wrx said:


> That was almost enough to make me gag.



I had visions of both of them with their flies down offering one another a bit of 'relief' at the thought


----------



## girofan (29 Jul 2009)

Molecule Man said:


> Oh yes, I remember now.
> Personally, I don't think either of them comes out of this looking good. And perhaps Johan Bruyneel comes out of it looking even worse.
> I pity the public relations team at Team Astana?





Astana PR team. Phil & Paul?


----------



## Molecule Man (29 Jul 2009)

girofan said:


> Astana PR team. Phil & Paul?



-Astana
+RadioShack?


----------



## Chuffy (29 Jul 2009)

Molecule Man said:


> -Astana
> +RadioShack?


Well Sherwen was PR for Motorola back in the day, so he's got previous!


----------



## Flying_Monkey (30 Jul 2009)

The people who think Lance Armstrong is the best cyclist ever are, I am afraid, a bit like those people who vote for Lord of the Rings as best film ever because it was the last film they remember...

For those frankly ignorant people, please take a look at Eddy Merckx's palmares: 

Lance doesn't come close. He may well be the best cyclist of the last 10 years, but there's more than 100 years of cycling history beyond that, and several riders who top Lance.

It is worth reading this very detailed assessment (which also lays out its methodology in full for us to inspect). We had a brief discussion of it here.

Lance is rated as 11th - he might go up a place or two after coming back for third in this year's TdF at his age, I don't know...


----------



## Flying_Monkey (30 Jul 2009)

User3094 said:


> You're very good at presenting _opinon_ as _fact_ Monkey. You should make a career out of it.



Yeah, very funny.

The point is that this isn't just a matter of opinion, there are ways of comparing one cyclist with another, and some quite obvious ones at that. The point of The Virtual Musette lists is that the methods and judgements are made clear, so you can argue with them, but 'well I like Lance (or whoever), he's the greatest' should be treated with the large spoonful of salt that all fan statements deserve (just as people who think that the TdF is the only thing in cycling probably don't know that much about the sport... ).


----------



## Panter (30 Jul 2009)

The thing is, with all these great cyclists of old that keep being presented, I thought they were all on drugs and so don't really count?


----------



## mangaman (30 Jul 2009)

Panter said:


> The thing is, with all these great cyclists of old that keep being presented, I thought they were all on drugs and so don't really count?



Er no - at least no more than modern cyclists

Pre the 1980s no real performance enhancing drugs like EPO / blood doping existed

Sure they have always taken amphetamines / alcohol /pot Belge to kill the pain and give a boost but these don't improve your performance over a 3 week tour

Have you not noticed all the drug busts in the last few years?


----------



## Chuffy (30 Jul 2009)

mangaman said:


> Er no - at least no more than modern cyclists
> 
> Pre the 1980s no real performance enhancing drugs like EPO / blood doping existed
> 
> ...


Hmmm. I'd have to take issue with that definition of what constitutes using drugs to cheat. If you are taking something to stop you from feeling so much pain then you _will_ get an advantage over a non-doping rider. Whether the drug boosts your actual performance isn't really the point.


----------



## Panter (30 Jul 2009)

Just to be clear, my previous post was slightly tounge in cheek, but not very 

I have heard lots about the drug busts, and also read the stories of these famous cyclists of old dying on fearsome climbs and their blood has been full of amphetamines and alchohol etc
I didn't know that EPO has not been available for that long but amphetamine and cocaine have been around a long time.

Amphetamine and cocaine CAN considerably enhance athletic performance if dosed appropriately.

Regarding my feelings on Lance, yes, I'm a fanboy. I don't know (but somehow doubt) that he's the greatest cyclist of all time but as posted before, that's a subjective thing anyway.
I haven't been interested in cycling long enough to give any sort of my opinion on that.
I don't think I'd even like the man socially, he seems to be too focused on winning and acheivements but that is obviously, pure speculation.

I do admire him though, he's been through a lot (so have countless other people I know) but to win the Tour Seven times is a hell of an acheivement and he's never been busted for doping despite (and correct me if I'm mistaken) all the restrospective blood analysis which goes on now.


----------



## Chuffy (30 Jul 2009)

Panter said:


> I do admire him though, he's been through a lot (so have countless other people I know) but to win the Tour Seven times is a hell of an acheivement and he's never been busted for doping despite (and correct me if I'm mistaken) all the restrospective blood analysis which goes on now.


He was busted, retrospectively, for his '99 samples but the re-tests weren't part of any retrospective testing regime. The retrospective analysis that you are referring to is a relatively new thing which has been brought in since he retired. You also have to bear in mind that blood doping with your own blood (a technique that US Postal are alleged to have used) is almost impossible to detect.


----------



## Molecule Man (30 Jul 2009)

How long has blood doping been around for? It must have been possible for a long time.


----------



## Panter (30 Jul 2009)

Chuffy said:


> *He was busted, retrospectively, for his '99 samples but the re-tests weren't part of any retrospective testing regime. The retrospective analysis that you are referring to is a relatively new thing which has been brought in since he retired*. You also have to bear in mind that blood doping with your own blood (a technique that US Postal are alleged to have used) is almost impossible to detect.



Thanks, I didn't know that 

Do you have any links to news reports at the time or anything? (not disbelieving you, just interested to know what my clean-living hero has been up to.)


----------



## Will1985 (30 Jul 2009)

Who said he is the best ever? I'm not going to read back to find out.

Lance himself says that Merckx was "the greatest of all time" - can't argue with that.


----------



## GilesM (30 Jul 2009)

Molecule Man said:


> How long has blood doping been around for? It must have been possible for a long time.



Blood doping has been around for ages, it has always been difficult to detect.

Have a look here, if I remember correctly the USA olympic cycling team of 1984 were quite open about it.

http://www.stanford.edu/~learnest/cyclops/dopes.htm


----------



## Chuffy (30 Jul 2009)

Panter said:


> Thanks, I didn't know that
> 
> Do you have any links to news reports at the time or anything? (not disbelieving you, just interested to know what my clean-living hero has been up to.)


The '99 samples tested +tive for EPO. I don't have links to hand, but if you Google for David Walsh and a French journalist called Damian Ressiot (he broke the story while working for L'Equipe) you should find what you need.


----------



## Panter (30 Jul 2009)

Chuffy said:


> The '99 samples tested +tive for EPO. I don't have links to hand, but if you Google for David Walsh and a French journalist called Damian Ressiot (he broke the story while working for L'Equipe) you should find what you need.



Thanks Chuffy, I've had a quick look but can only find allegations and accusations like this.
I'll have a good search when I get home this evening.


----------



## trustysteed (30 Jul 2009)

User3094 said:


> You're very good at presenting _opinon_ as _fact_ Monkey. You should make a career out of it.



Yes, he always is. And woe betide you if you don't agree with his opinion.


----------



## Chuffy (30 Jul 2009)

Panter said:


> Thanks Chuffy, I've had a quick look but can only find allegations and accusations like this.
> I'll have a good search when I get home this evening.


The piece summarises the case pretty well. You say ‘allegations’ in a way that suggests you’re not sure about the piece. Fair enough, but bear in mind that Walsh and the Times had been sued by Armstrong before, so they would be understandably cautious in their reporting. The key facts to bear in mind are that the lab carried out reliable tests on stored samples for purposes other than catching drug cheats. They found 12 positives. It was only because the French journalist Ressiot managed to connect the ID numbers on the samples with the id numbers on the testing schedule that it was possible to reveal that many of the positives came from Armstrong. A ‘lesser’ rider (that is with less Tour wins, less money, less power and a smaller fanbase) would have been absolutely buried by this (in my opinion).


----------



## Panter (30 Jul 2009)

Chuffy said:


> *The piece summarises the case pretty well. You say ‘allegations’ in a way that suggests you’re not sure about the piece*. Fair enough, but bear in mind that Walsh and the Times had been sued by Armstrong before, so they would be understandably cautious in their reporting. The key facts to bear in mind are that the lab carried out reliable tests on stored samples for purposes other than catching drug cheats. They found 12 positives. It was only because the French journalist Ressiot managed to connect the ID numbers on the samples with the id numbers on the testing schedule that it was possible to reveal that many of the positives came from Armstrong. A ‘lesser’ rider (that is with less Tour wins, less money, less power and a smaller fanbase) would have been absolutely buried by this (in my opinion).



My big problem with all this is that there are just so many people who would love to (and who would profit out of it) bring him down that I'm sceptical.
If there is a published, authenticated piece of work to show that he doped then fair enough.

I'm also a bit unsure how the journalist managed, luckily, to tie the sample numbers up to Lance (and Lance only.)
In my lab, when we use unknown spiked samples for proficency testing, they are exactly that, unknowns, and I'm surprised that a journalist had access to that sort of information.

As I say, I'll have a good read this evening and try to understand a bit more about what has passed.

EDIT: Sorry, forgot to add. If Lance did successfully sue the Times, he must have had good grounds to disprove those allegations?


----------



## Hont (30 Jul 2009)

GilesM said:


> Whatever you think about Bertie and Lance, it is obvious that Bertie screwed up big time when he dropped Kloden, and towed team Andy and Frank away from him, if he hadn't done that Astana may have got 1,2,3 in Paris, it may have just been doumb or it might be for other reasons, but whatever the reason, it was not impressive.



It certainly didn't go to plan () but I don't think you can call it dumb, because he spoke to Klöden about it first. Either they misunderstood each other (apparently they communicate in English) or Klöden is not very good at assessing his own condition. Either way Klöden cracked so badly I don't think he would have hung in anyway. He couldn't even hold Amstrong's wheel at the finish.

And it certainly didn't stop Astana getting a 1,2,3 in Paris because Andy Schleck was always going to get in the way of that.


----------



## Will1985 (30 Jul 2009)

Err....there was absolutely no reason to initiate an attack in the first place Hont. It was entirely up to the Schleck brothers to attack (both being below Kloden in the GC) and for the Astana riders to follow. At the point of attack, Contador's advantage over the next rider was effectively 2'17" to Kloden as Armstrong and Wiggo were already down the road. It wouldn't have changed Astana failing to take out the top three spots, but it certainly wrecked Kloden's chances of a podium finish.


----------



## Molecule Man (30 Jul 2009)

User3094 said:


> [Am still waiting for someone to tell me why the TdF isnt the Blue Riband of cycle races btw]



Well, I'm a longish-term casual cycling fan (i.e. watched Tour de France on TV since channel 4 started coverage in 1986 and never raced myself), and the TdF is clearly still the most important race in the calendar. 
However, in the last year or two, I have become much more aware of the other great races throughout the season. I watched Paris-Roubaix highlights for the first time this year and was amazed by how tough an event it is. There has been some really exciting racing in the other grand tours the last few years. They are just as tough, though maybe not always as competitive?
As I have learnt more about cycle racing, I have come to have a greater appreciation of the different talents involved in different events. I confess that some of this is to do with recent British talent, e.g. I thought sprint stages were relatively dull until Cav started doing well, but my interest will remain I think.
So what I am think I am trying to say is that the Tour may be the greatest bike race of all, but the other great races are not far behind in terms of toughness, romance, history, etc., and I think this makes cycling so much more interesting, that there is this great breadth and depth to it. I think it contrasts well with athletics for example, where it seems everything revolves around the Olympics, and everything else in the intervening 4 years is much less important.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (30 Jul 2009)

trustysteed said:


> Yes, he always is. And woe betide you if you don't agree with his opinion.



Yeah, right, what am I going to do, be sarcastic to you?


----------



## Flying_Monkey (30 Jul 2009)

User3094 said:


> Ah so we're eback to the "Lance is a tosser, ergo I am a 'proper' cycling fan"...
> 
> [Am still waiting for someone to tell me why the TdF isnt the Blue Riband of cycle races btw]



The TdF is the most prestigious of _stage races_ - and nobody has claimed otherwise, so you are trying to create an argument out of nothing - but it isn't even the only type of race. There are others with claims to be the most prestigious day races for example. There are also harder events, different events. And there are different ways of winning the Tour. The TVM listing (for example) takes account of this. You could win it without ever taking a stage, or you could win it by winning multiple stages too, you could take the KoM as well as the Yellow, or the Green as well as the Yellow - for example. 

And by the way, for the hard of understanding, I might indeed think Lance is a tosser (to judge from his public behaviour, he's not someone I would get on with), but as I have said when this question was asked directly, I also admire him as a cyclist, in fact I think he is one of the greats, just not the best nor even in the top 5. And yes, that is because I have some acquaintance with the history of road cycling - not as much as many other people here by any means, but enough to know that at least.


----------



## Chuffy (30 Jul 2009)

Panter said:


> My big problem with all this is that there are just so many people who would love to (and who would profit out of it) bring him down that I'm sceptical.


Not sure where the profit is and the people who might want to see him brought to book (note change of emphasis) want to do so, not because they are just 'haterz' (cf the online fanboy brigade, and I don't necessarily mean anyone on here, there are other places where they hang out) or because they are French or any of the other spurious reasons that Team LA have floated, but because they don't like him being held up as a virtual living god while being a cheat and a bully. If there is any profit to be made it's from him _not_ being exposed.



> If there is a published, authenticated piece of work to show that he doped then fair enough.


I'd argue that the '99 results are just that. They don't quite equate to a positive test only in that they were conducted too long after the event for any proceedings to take place and they weren't part of a testing regime per se.



> I'm also a bit unsure how the journalist managed, luckily, to tie the sample numbers up to Lance (and Lance only.)
> In my lab, when we use unknown spiked samples for proficency testing, they are exactly that, unknowns, and I'm surprised that a journalist had access to that sort of information.


You'd have to read Walsh (Lance to Landis) which has a much more detailed account of how it was done. Bear in mind that if the samples had been tested positive back in '99 there would have to be a way to link them to the relevant rider. All the journo did was to put the relevant information together (iirc it was doping control forms from the UCI and the sample log from the lab. No-one would have had the two pieces of info together but both pieces would have had the sample ID number on them). The book also explains how it would have been virtually impossible to spike the samples (ie, to rig the tests).



> As I say, I'll have a good read this evening and try to understand a bit more about what has passed.


I think that Crackle has the CC Floating Library copy of Lance to Landis. Perhaps he'll re-launch it into polite society? 



> EDIT: Sorry, forgot to add. If Lance did successfully sue the Times, he must have had good grounds to disprove those allegations?


Cannae remember exactly what he sued them over (it was extracts from Walsh's previous book, but I don't recall the exact content) but the article you linked to mentions the test results _and_ the previous legal action.

As I said, if it was any other cyclist then no-one would question the results.


----------



## Hont (30 Jul 2009)

Will1985 said:


> Err....there was absolutely no reason to initiate an attack in the first place Hont.



Some riders ride negatively and some try and take time whenever they can, because you never know when you are going to have a bad day. Only hindsight tells us the right strategy.

My contention was that it was not dumb, because he clearly checked that Klöden thought he could follow. My understanding of the incident was that he thought that they would _both_ drop Frank and therefore _both_ gain time. They didn't _need_ to gain more time but it's certainly not dumb to do so if you think that you can. What went wrong, only Contador and Klöden know. 

Much of the focus on this incident has been due to Armstrong's criticism of it, which I find a little hypocritical considering he did almost exactly the same thing on Plateau de Beille in 2002 when he attacked Beloki and his teammate Heras.



> but it certainly wrecked Kloden's chances of a podium finish.



There is no way you can say that it _certainly_ wrecked his chances, given how badly he cracked and how many unknowns there are. We don't know whether the Schlecks would have attacked again before the summit, for example. If they had the result would have been much the same.

You are entitled to your opinion that it wrecked his chances, as I am that it didn't really make any difference.


----------



## Will1985 (30 Jul 2009)

Hont said:


> We don't know whether the Schlecks would have attacked again before the summit, for example. If they had the result would have been much the same.


Of course we don't know, but the onus was on the Schlecks to initiate, not the yellow jersey. Kloden was wrecked by the acceleration - sure, if something had happened further up, he would have dropped but wouldn't have lost as much as 2'27". Watching it on the day, I felt that the Schlecks were content to ride away from Armstrong and Wiggins as a foursome.


----------



## Crackle (30 Jul 2009)

Chuffy said:


> I think that Crackle has the CC Floating Library copy of Lance to Landis. Perhaps he'll re-launch it into polite society?



Nay not me. I think it was JTM who last raffled it, can't remember who it went to.


----------



## GilesM (30 Jul 2009)

Will1985 said:


> Of course we don't know, but the onus was on the Schlecks to initiate, not the yellow jersey. Kloden was wrecked by the acceleration - sure, if something had happened further up, he would have dropped but wouldn't have lost as much as 2'27". Watching it on the day, I felt that the Schlecks were content to ride away from Armstrong and Wiggins as a foursome.



Exactly, there was no reason for Bertie to attack.


----------



## girofan (30 Jul 2009)

GilesM said:


> Exactly, there was no reason for Bertie to attack.



I thought Bertie showed the utmost restraint in not really attacking hard and dropping Kloden so far behind you would need radar to find him!!
What you have to remember, is that Bruyneel and Armstrong, and most of Astana riders wanted an Armstrong victory in Paris, even though Bertie was designated as team leader. This isolated Bertie to such an extent that he was riding without any assistance from his 'so called' team mates! Except perhaps Paulhino?
Most of the Astana riders backed Armstrong because they want a contract for 2010 with his and Bruyneel's team Radio Shack, not because they think Armstrong a nice bloke, or that he was the best bet to win the Tour.
So they were willing to stab Contador in the back to gain long-term financial security.
As for Bruyneel, a bigger KIPPER, (one-eyed, two-faced, bastard), the sport has ever known. Armstrong has him dancing on a string like a puppet. He has all the integrity of a shark!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Skip Madness (30 Jul 2009)

GilesM said:


> Exactly, there was no reason for Bertie to attack.


There was a stage to be won.


----------



## Noodley (30 Jul 2009)

GilesM said:


> Exactly, there was no reason for Bertie to attack.



Oh FFS. Of course there was, he wanted to win and IIRC he was interviewed afterwards and Kloden had told him he was okay.

Wind it back a few stages and Lance got praised for reading the race sooooo well and making the jump and gaining valuable seconds....it's unbelievable. 

I can see what some people see in Lance (honestly I can), but can't understand why so many people just ignore all the evidence. He's a tosser.


----------



## GilesM (31 Jul 2009)

Noodley said:


> Oh FFS. Of course there was, he wanted to win and IIRC he was interviewed afterwards and Kloden had told him he was okay.
> 
> Wind it back a few stages and Lance got praised for reading the race sooooo well and making the jump and gaining valuable seconds....it's unbelievable.
> 
> I can see what some people see in Lance (honestly I can), but can't understand why so many people just ignore all the evidence. He's a tosser.



Not trying to stick up for Armstrong in anyway, and I'm happy that Kloden was blown away as it moved Wiggins up the overall GC, I just think it was pointless and a bit dumb as he only impacted his own team mate (Kloden) not anyone else, if Kloden really told him to go that's fine, but I doubt we will ever know that for sure. Bertie showed he had the ability to keep team Andy and Frank under control when needed.


----------



## GilesM (31 Jul 2009)

girofan said:


> What you have to remember, is that Bruyneel and Armstrong, and most of Astana riders wanted an Armstrong victory in Paris, even though Bertie was designated as team leader. This isolated Bertie to such an extent that he was riding without any assistance from his 'so called' team mates! Except perhaps Paulhino?



Maybe you're, we'll see how he gets on in another team, with him as the no questions asked team leader.


----------



## dellzeqq (31 Jul 2009)

Panter said:


> Amphetamine and cocaine CAN considerably enhance athletic performance if dosed appropriately.


They can help you shag all night as well. Bugger Tamiflu, why isn't the NHS giving it out?


----------



## dellzeqq (31 Jul 2009)

Will1985 said:


> Err....there was absolutely no reason to initiate an attack in the first place Hont. It was entirely up to the Schleck brothers to attack (both being below Kloden in the GC) and for the Astana riders to follow. At the point of attack, Contador's advantage over the next rider was effectively 2'17" to Kloden as Armstrong and Wiggo were already down the road. It wouldn't have changed Astana failing to take out the top three spots,* but it certainly wrecked Kloden's chances of a podium finish*.


 And for that reason alone it was worth while. Contador did say that he had spoken to Kloden, but, to be honest, I don't think Kloden wanted to be ahead of Armstrong in the GC. And, to be fair to Contador, he couldn't rely on anybody, not even his team manager to help him - so why not ride for himself?


----------



## yenrod (31 Jul 2009)

dellzeqq said:


> They can help you shag all night as well. Bugger Tamiflu, why isn't the NHS giving it out?


----------



## Landslide (31 Jul 2009)

dellzeqq said:


> They can help you shag all night as well. Bugger Tamiflu, why isn't the NHS giving it out?



Not convinced amphetamines help on that front...
...ever heard the term "raging speedhorn"?


----------



## Landslide (31 Jul 2009)

Crackle said:


> Nay not me. I think it was JTM who last raffled it, can't remember who it went to.



JTM to me, me to mr Mag00.


----------



## Hont (31 Jul 2009)

Noodley said:


> Wind it back a few stages and Lance got praised for reading the race sooooo well and making the jump and gaining valuable seconds....



I think that had more to do with Armstrong's hearing skills than his ability to read. George didn't do a very convincing job of denying that he'd given him the heads up.


----------



## andy_wrx (31 Jul 2009)

But it was Lance cracking the whip onto his two domestiques in that breakaway with Columbia, trying to make the maximum break to the rest of the peloton...including his team leader...

Who was it who said 'the road would decide' who was team leader - Bruyneel or Armstrong ?

Armstrong's way of doing it was in that stage 3 crosswinds breakaway.

Contador contradicted him on the climb to Andorra Arcalis.


For another viewpoint on Armstrong, how the 2004 Postal team worked internally, what sort of man Lance is and how he expects his teammates to behave and what happens when they don't, also try Daniel Coyle's Tour de Force (Lance Armstrong's War in the USA)
- interesting read...


----------

