# Armstrong coming back for the 2009 TdF



## Kovu (8 Sep 2008)

http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/8539260/Report:-Armstrong-will-come-out-of-retirement-in-2009

Apparently ... not sure if this is going to happen, but thought it was of interest, what you guys think?


----------



## mondobongo (8 Sep 2008)

What would be his motivation to do this? Posting his Drug Test Results online would not alleviate suspicion about his 7 wins and riding for Astana as well what a surprise I am sure Contador will move over for him. Or is this a ploy by Astana to make sure they get an entry?

For the sake of the Sport and the Tour I hope he stays away.


----------



## Kovu (8 Sep 2008)

mondobongo said:


> What would be his motivation to do this? Posting his Drug Test Results online would not alleviate suspicion about his 7 wins and riding for Astana as well what a surprise I am sure Contador will move over for him. Or is this a ploy by Astana to make sure they get an entry?
> 
> For the sake of the Sport and the Tour I hope he stays away.



That's what I thought, we hardly need a Tour that is headlined by him ... but a story like this comes out before every Tour anyways.


----------



## mondobongo (9 Sep 2008)

Cycling News are running it as a newsflash apparently the rumours are coming out of Eurobike but even Bruyneel is surprised.


----------



## mr_hippo (9 Sep 2008)

From a trailer for the Larry King chat show on CNN
Larry King: "Have you ever taken an illegal substance?"
Lance Armstrong: "I have never doped!"
That sounds similar to:-
Larry King: "Have you ever drunk alcohol?"
Mr Hippo: "I have never had a Stella."
Lance will 'race for no salary or bonuses and post his internally tested blood work online.' I think I have just seen a pig flying at about 2000 feet above my house! If he is now willing to publish internally tested blood work, why didn't he do that when the rumours were at their height? Has he found a different untraceable substance?
Yes, I know he won the Tour de France seven times but what about the Giro d'Italia, Veulta a Espagne and the Spring Classics? Compare his record with that of Eddie Merck - both active at the same ages. Would Merckx have won more TdFs if he only concentrated on that one race? Would Armstrong have won less TdFs if he entered more races?


----------



## Keith Oates (9 Sep 2008)

He retired at the top and I think he should let it stay that way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## rich p (9 Sep 2008)

mr_hippo said:


> From a trailer for the Larry King chat show on CNN
> Larry King: "Have you ever taken an illegal substance?"
> Lance Armstrong: "I have never doped!"
> That sounds similar to:-
> ...




I'm no great LA fan but dope is dope in my book. You seem to easily misconstrue what most people would think was a straight answer. Whether or not you believe the answer is up to you.

Why are you comparing his record with others? He won 7 tours irrespective of whether he was better than Merckx. Different times, different ambitions. Was Rod Laver better than Roger Federer? Who cares and who can say?


----------



## Chuffy (9 Sep 2008)

rich p said:


> I'm no great LA fan but dope is dope in my book. You seem to easily misconstrue what most people would think was a straight answer. Whether or not you believe the answer is up to you.
> 
> Why are you comparing his record with others? He won 7 tours irrespective of whether he was better than Merckx. Different times, different ambitions. Was Rod Laver better than Roger Federer? Who cares and who can say?


When it comes to dope, answers have to be straighter than straight. Too many riders have wriggled like fish on hooks when asked perfectly straight questions. Remember Virenque? Remember Landis? And all the rest...

Lance's record is often compared disparagingly to the other greats for precisely the reasons that Mr Hippo states. The other standard comment is that if Merckx had focussed on the Tour exclusively then he would have won many more. Standard bar-room cycling discussion fare.

Hey, with luck we'll have Lance racing against Landis, Basso and Rasmussen! Won't that be nice?


----------



## zimzum42 (9 Sep 2008)

Lance was a top rider at a time when all top riders were doping some way or another

he must have been doping.

it seems most likely that he had enough cash to make sure he never got caught out


----------



## rich p (9 Sep 2008)

Chuffy said:


> When it comes to dope, answers have to be straighter than straight. Too many riders have wriggled like fish on hooks when asked perfectly straight questions. Remember Virenque? Remember Landis? And all the rest...
> 
> Lance's record is often compared disparagingly to the other greats for precisely the reasons that Mr Hippo states. The other standard comment is that if Merckx had focussed on the Tour exclusively then he would have won many more. Standard bar-room cycling discussion fare.
> 
> Hey, with luck we'll have Lance racing against Landis, Basso and Rasmussen! Won't that be nice?





That's my point I think! He didn't wriggle. He said he never doped - a straight answer but whether you believe it or not is up to you. I personally don't believe it but I think too much is read into his statement.

I also don't wish to see him back in the Tdf.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (9 Sep 2008)

Well, there go Cadel Evans' chances then...


----------



## Ludwig (9 Sep 2008)

There is more chance of me becoming the Arch Bishop of Canterbury


----------



## papercorn2000 (9 Sep 2008)

I wouldn't like to see him come back. If he did, I couldn't see him as a contender - possibly a super domestique like Roche, Bernard or Delgado in the latter stages of their careers, otherwise...


----------



## llanberispass (9 Sep 2008)

He will only come back if thinks he is going to win.

My bet is he:

1. Gets fit (didnt he do well in some mountain bike race recently)

2. Rides his favourite training ride, sees he is not far off his best time.

3. The adrenaline gets going and he just can't resist having one more shot at it.

The only problem I see is that may be a few one off training rides are not the same as 21 days - but knowing Lance he will have probably simulated this already.

Not sure the French public will give him an easy ride, they used to hate him enough before. 

And I was so glad when he gave up and we had a more open Tour...


----------



## yenrod (9 Sep 2008)

I'd love to see him back.

Imagine it !


----------



## Toshiba Boy (9 Sep 2008)

I'd heard Merckx said that he might come out of retirement, but everybody else said they'd just hang up their wheels if he did


----------



## mondobongo (9 Sep 2008)

Good analysis of the rumour/story here.


----------



## Mr Phoebus (9 Sep 2008)

Just as the cycling commentators were _finally_ not quoting his name every few minutes on the cycling broadcasts as well.
Oh, well.


----------



## maurice (9 Sep 2008)

I'd love to see it happen, would be sensational!


----------



## Dayvo (9 Sep 2008)

Did Eddie Merckx (n)ever dope? 
We (the cycling fans) will never know.
There is no proof LA did. Leave it at that, but naturally have your own opinion about it.
LA should stay retired.


----------



## Kovu (9 Sep 2008)

zimzum42 said:


> Lance was a top rider at a time when all top riders were doping some way or another
> 
> he must have been doping.
> 
> it seems most likely that he had enough cash to make sure he never got caught out



So your basing he must be doping because everyone else was? That isn't a real good reason ... I'm still sat on the fence for whethere he is or not, but that's not my point anyways.

If he comes back ... it will be interesting to say the least.


----------



## yello (9 Sep 2008)

Is it April 1 already?

Someone's 'aving a larf... I mean



> compete in five road races, including the Tour de France.



"compete" in 5 races... when's LA done that? Turn up maybe, as a training ride, but compete? Nah! He wasn't doing that for the last x years so he's not about to start doing it at the age of 37/38!


----------



## Dayvo (9 Sep 2008)

Seems like a lot of people have forgotten that LA was the world champion in 1993.


----------



## yello (9 Sep 2008)

Dayvo said:


> Seems like a lot of people have forgotten that LA was the world champion in 1993.



Sorry, I'm baffled. What do you mean Dayvo?


----------



## mondobongo (9 Sep 2008)

He did used to race in other races and yes he was World Champion in 1993 he also won Fleche Wallonne in 1996 whilst its not a monument it is still a Spring Classic and a big race to win. I t was only later in his career that the Tour became sole focus.

Don't forget that a couple of those races he is rumoured to want to race are ASO events and that he may not be welcome. It is rumoured that Astana were knocked back by ASO this year not so much as to Astanas history but that it was Bruyneel they wanted to get and they now had the opportunity.


----------



## yello (9 Sep 2008)

Has anyone read any of the comments on the article? This one made me smile....



> all of my climbing might not be long but some have gradients of 22-23% for 1/4 or 1/2 mile. yesterday took a rode from Neosho MO that was all climbing, tried to keep large chain ring entire time but when i dropped to 85 had to go the 37 tooth.



The guy should be riding the TdF!

Yes, I appreciate LA won other events earlier in his career but it was his recent year focus I was referring to that makes it unlikely, imho, that he'd agree to a 5 competition a year come back. It's a moot point anyway, this story ain't nought but some out of control rumour... again imho!


----------



## Dayvo (9 Sep 2008)

yello said:


> Sorry, I'm baffled. What do you mean Dayvo?



No major significance to it, yello; just that LA wasn't just a flash in the pan at the Tour; he was a world champion at the age of 21.

From (albeit) wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lance_Armstrong#Early_career

and had major victories _before_ all the TdeF victories, in which many cycling fans have accused him of doping, despite there being a total lack of evidence. 

If he was a complete nobody and won consecutive TdeF then, yes, it would appear suspicious, but LA's potential and calibre was there for all to see, before his first tour win, and before his illness.


----------



## Paulus (9 Sep 2008)

Could it just be that he is bored being away from the pro ranks and the lure of bike racing is too strong?? His personal life hasn't been too hot since his break up with Ms Crowe, allegedly for still training .


----------



## zimzum42 (9 Sep 2008)

For me, that's the point, he won a load of races at a time when everyone was doping, the time before his TdF victories.....

My favourite rider was Big Mig, he was never shown to be doping, but he probably was. Doesn't mean he wasn't an amazing rider.....


----------



## yello (9 Sep 2008)

Dayvo said:


> LA's potential and calibre was there for all to see, before his first tour win, and before his illness.



Ah, with you now  And agreed.


----------



## Mr Phoebus (9 Sep 2008)

Dayvo said:


> Did *Eddie* Merckx (n)ever dope?
> We (the cycling fans) will never know.
> There is no proof LA did. Leave it at that, but naturally have your own opinion about it.
> LA should stay retired.



Sacrilege!!!  Prepare the gibbet!


----------



## Chuffy (9 Sep 2008)

Dayvo said:


> No major significance to it, yello; just that LA wasn't just a flash in the pan at the Tour; he was a world champion at the age of 21.


Hmmm, before his come back in 1999 he was more of a one day racer, not a Tour rider or even a time trial specialist. These things all came after he returned from his cancer treatment. They also coincide with his relationship with Dr Ferrari.


----------



## Kovu (9 Sep 2008)

This looks like fact guys, he's coming back. Sky sports have just read out an offical statement by him ... on the lines of 

"Yes i am coming back ... I am going to win an 8th tour de france" or something like that.

So it loosk truth.


----------



## Kovu (9 Sep 2008)

Yeah it's truth ... sky sports are running it now. Well that's blown the tour for next year!


----------



## Crackle (9 Sep 2008)

It seems incredible if he does. Can he win it again? It would silence everyone if he did. But.....

Well I for one would be off to France next year to watch him one more time. For me, no one has stamped their mark on the tour since he retired.

I may not like everything about him but the whole spectacle is captivating, fascinating and compelling.


----------



## Kovu (9 Sep 2008)

Agreeded Crackle ... He says he's doing to raise awareness for Testicle Cancer again. 

It's interesting ...


----------



## Chuffy (9 Sep 2008)

Crackle said:


> It seems incredible if he does. Can he win it again?* It would silence everyone if he did.*


Yeah right! Nothing he does in the future will change what he did in the past.



Kovu said:


> He says he's doing to raise awareness for Testicle Cancer again.


I knew it was a load of bollocks!
Boom, tish.....


Seriously, why do this, other than to do his usual thing, which is to pursue a vendetta against anyone who has ever slighted him. It would prove nothing and if the peloton are anything other than a craven bunch of gutless cowards they won't be afraid of him. There's been a lot of change in three years and he won't be able to bully his way around as before.


----------



## Crackle (9 Sep 2008)

Chuffy said:


> Yeah right! Nothing he does in the future will change what he did in the past.



What did he do in the past? He won the tour 7 times and beat cancer. Did he dope? Unproven, though I as many have suspicions. 

I've ploughed my way through LA Confidential, 90% shite and 10% he's not as nice as he seems. So he's not nice, so he's a bully, I wait to see how he'll fare and who'll stand up to him. That's the fascination.


----------



## Bollo (9 Sep 2008)

In writing...

http://www.velonews.com/article/82965/lance-armstrong-returns-to-professional-racing


----------



## rich p (9 Sep 2008)

Gawd 'elp us. I don't think I can bear a year of the PR


----------



## jags (9 Sep 2008)

he is the greatest cyclist of all time ,im glad to have seen him win all 7 tours the man is unbeatable in the tour will he win another ,put your house on it .the great eddie wouldent lace la's boots in the tour armstrong can do it all mercks could never climb as armstrong could.


----------



## maurice (10 Sep 2008)

That's made my day! Think I'll definitely be going over to watch a stage, I can see the 09 tour more than making up for the lack of excitement (excluding Cav's wins) in the 08 tour.


----------



## Crackle (10 Sep 2008)

jags said:


> he is the greatest cyclist of all time ,im glad to have seen him win all 7 tours the man is unbeatable in the tour will he win another ,put your house on it .the great eddie wouldent lace la's boots in the tour armstrong can do it all mercks could never climb as armstrong could.



Steady now. I think I'll hold onto my house just yet. Greatest cyclist of all time? Well, a few other names spring to mind.


----------



## Ashtrayhead (10 Sep 2008)

Statement from Lance....
http://livestrongblog.org/2008/09/0...rn-to-professional-cycling/?tr=y&auid=3991019


----------



## Ashtrayhead (10 Sep 2008)

.....now, where did I put my yellow band?


----------



## shooter560 (10 Sep 2008)

Rock On, best thing that could have happened, like him or not, he was never proven to take anything illegal, I therefore conclude that without any proof he was the best cyclist with a strong team at the TdF for 7 years. If he does the 09 TdF and could win it then I for one will be watching the final stage from the roadside.


----------



## yello (10 Sep 2008)

My gut reaction is one of extreme disappointment. Leaving aside the fact that I think the man's a fool, I do genuinely believe there is a new generation of riders now and LA does not belong. The king is dead etc. 

I predict that there'll be words and tears before next July (no shoot sherlock - sorry yenners!). I'm hoping it'll be a new team, I hope he doesn't join Astana (is it part of some perverse power play?? that'd be fun)... but who knows... Garmin/Chipotle/Slipstream maybe?? (And Miller to Team GB!!)

As I say, I can't help but feel this is a bad thing; for LA, for the TdF, for cycling.


----------



## mondobongo (10 Sep 2008)

Jags go and read a history book and get some perspective on what he achieved, he can not be compared to Hinault, Merckx and Anquetil. As forbeing able to climb better than Merckx I think not baby puppy.

This is not a good thing for the sport, it has the ability to turn the Tour and the other races he wants to enter into a Circus.

I sincerely hope that ASO have the balls to tell him that he can't enter as I am sure that they can deal with a little bit of pressure from Sarkozy. I think he is half expecting a problem as why bring up that he will appeal to Sarkozy if refused entry otherwise.


----------



## papercorn2000 (10 Sep 2008)

jags said:


> he is the greatest cyclist of all time ,im glad to have seen him win all 7 tours the man is unbeatable in the tour will he win another ,put your house on it .the great eddie wouldent lace la's boots in the tour armstrong can do it all mercks could never climb as armstrong could.



Go read about the 1969 TDF.
And while you are at it try to get a handle on grammar.


----------



## John the Monkey (10 Sep 2008)

Apropos of the greatest rider discussion, still Merckx for me personally.

So Armstrong has 7 tours? How many of those did he win all the classifications in? How many grand tours and classics did he manage? Feh.

What crossed my mind (after hearing the announcement reported on the Today programme (first story on the sports report, good god!)) was what existing team would let him ride the way he used to with US Postal/Discovery (i.e. with everyone else essentially domestiques to his team leader) ? I can't imagine any existing teams where he could ride the way he used to and not put noses seriously out of joint. Is he hoping to build a team out of signings from the fallout of sponsors leaving the sport (Barloworld, Credit Agricole, Gerolsteiner) I wonder?


----------



## Smeggers (10 Sep 2008)

jeez - its true.

that was a surprise.


----------



## John the Monkey (10 Sep 2008)

maurice said:


> ...I can see the 09 tour more than making up for the lack of excitement (excluding Cav's wins) in the 08 tour.


FFS, what were you watching?

Did you have your telly tuned to Cadel exclusively, or something?


----------



## chris42 (10 Sep 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Well, there go Cadel Evans' chances then...



LOL
what a great comment!


----------



## mr_hippo (10 Sep 2008)

jags said:


> *he is the greatest cyclist of all time *,im glad to have seen him win all 7 tours the man is unbeatable in the tour will he win another ,put your house on it .the great eddie wouldent lace la's boots in the tour armstrong can do it all mercks could never climb as armstrong could.


How are you measuring 'greatness'? If you want to assign points - 5 points for France/Spain/Italy/Worlds and 3 for other major races; you will see that Merckx has 148 points and Armstrong has 49.
So Merckx could never climb? Merck won the KOM jersey in the TdF twice and in the Giro once. He also won points jerseys in France (3) and Italy (2). Apart from 7 maillot jaunes, how many other jerseys did Armstrong win?


----------



## John the Monkey (10 Sep 2008)

It's clear reading the comments on the blogs about this that a lot of people simply switched their tellies off in 2005, and haven't followed the sport since.

Incisive commentary along the lines of Armstrong being needed to clean up the sport (in these dark days of doping, wtf?!?!?), and to provide interest (in the year of one of the closest tours ever, with Cav and the Schlecks to watch?!?!?!) makes me wonder what the hell sport these people have been watching, as it doesn't seem to have been the 2008 cycling season.


----------



## Smeggers (10 Sep 2008)

You have to remember that Lance's celebrity status transcends the actual sport of cycling.

It can only be good for the sport IMO.


----------



## Paulus (10 Sep 2008)

The cynical side of me says that the profile of bike racing has diminished since LA retired, and his "return" could be a big marketing ploy to get the intrest back up?


----------



## Smeggers (10 Sep 2008)

Paulus said:


> The cynical side of me says that the profile of bike racing has diminished since LA retired, and his "return" could be a big marketing ploy to get the intrest back up?


For exactly the same reason Mr Beckham went to America.


----------



## maurice (10 Sep 2008)

John the Monkey said:


> FFS, what were you watching?
> 
> Did you have your telly tuned to Cadel exclusively, or something?



You thought 08 was exciting?

Fair enough, be sure to be standing in front of a chair when the world watching paint dry championships are on later.


----------



## John the Monkey (10 Sep 2008)

maurice said:


> You thought 08 was exciting?
> 
> Fair enough, be sure to be standing in front of a chair when the world watching paint dry championships are on later.



Err - the Schlecks? Sastre's attack up Alpe D'Huez? Evans desperately trying to hang on as attack after attack came at him on the earlier mountain stages? The closest Tour since LeMond/Fignon, effectively decided in the final time trial? Again, what channel were you watching?


----------



## rich p (10 Sep 2008)

maurice said:


> You thought 08 was exciting?
> 
> Fair enough, be sure to be standing in front of a chair when the world watching paint dry championships are on later.



I thought everyone thought it was a great tour this year. No sure favourites, attacks on the mountains, nobody taking an unassailable lead on the TT's and Cav to boot. What's not to like?

Compare that with the sterile races that LA won.


----------



## maurice (10 Sep 2008)

The Shlecks?? Alp D'Huez was 08's only saving grace, and that stage was something of a let down at the time.

If that's your standard of a great tour then all the better for you. Some people are happy with lower standard competition; I've no problem with that. If people are happy watching the B-competitors while all the best riders sit on the sidelines good for 'em.


----------



## Crackle (10 Sep 2008)

rich p said:


> Compare that with the sterile races that LA won.



Sterile? two words; Big Mig.

This year was good though and Evans has got the character but not the talent eh.


----------



## John the Monkey (10 Sep 2008)

maurice said:


> If that's your standard of a great tour then all the better for you. Some people are happy with lower standard competition; I've no problem with that. If people are happy watching the B-competitors while all the best riders sit on the sidelines good for 'em.


I disagree, profoundly. 

However, personal taste is a funny old thing Maurice, lets leave it at that, shall we?


----------



## maurice (10 Sep 2008)

John the Monkey said:


> I disagree, profoundly.
> 
> However, personal taste is a funny old thing Maurice, lets leave it at that, shall we?



Cool.

Can't wait for next year, all the best riders in the world competing.

FWIW I don't think Lance is going to walk away with it, but a tough fight to the end with CSC doing everything it can to stop him.

Imagine Alp du Huez this year but with Lance in Cadels shoes, now that would have been interesting for me.


----------



## papercorn2000 (10 Sep 2008)

rich p said:


> Compare that with the sterile races that LA won.



Essentially no one was good enough to go with him. He didn't just flatten everyone in the TTs, he made big attacks in the mountains - I thought they made good viewing. Especially when you mixed in someone like Pantani.

Don't think he'd have it as straightforward next time.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (10 Sep 2008)

A few predictions:

He'll ride for Garmin (or whatever Stapleton's team is called by then).

He probably wont start - entry is too much of a lottery these days. But if he does...

He wont win it, because someone else in the pro peloton will simply be better conditioned then him.

Everyone loves heroes and villains. Who you see Lance as depends on your POV. Regardless, if he does ride, it will make for more great headlines either way.

I wonder if the pie-muncher will come out of retirement!


----------



## Tetedelacourse (10 Sep 2008)

Additionally, Lance Armstrong is the greatest ever tour rider. He's not the greatest ever rider though, no sirree, not by a long chalk.


----------



## Noodley (10 Sep 2008)

Must be some new undetectable stuff on the market.


----------



## John the Monkey (10 Sep 2008)

Has anyone written a song about Lance, btw?

I found this fabbo podcast the other day (fabbo podcast link) which has a spendid song about Eddy Merckx in it ("Bravo Eddy", by Jean Narcy - listen also to the wonderfully bonkers "La Bicyclette" at the end - it's great)

Edit: A bit of googling answers my own question - I can't find an mp3, but there was a tune called "Mr Armstrong", composed by (then) student composer Wes Alexander.



> Alexander describes “Mr. Armstrong” as “a tribute song – not only to Lance as a cancer survivor, or as a cyclist, but also as a human being.” The message, underscored in the song’s chorus, is simple, he said: “We need a hero in these times.”
> 
> And while the main theme may be simple, the songwriter said he hopes his lyrics also will reveal some “hidden messages” for listeners as well. For instance, “Instead of trying to glorify Lance Armstrong, I wanted to bring him down to a human level. And I wanted to emphasize how he leads by example, but also tries to show people how to be their  own heroes.”




More: http://www.news.uiuc.edu/NEWS/05/0719armstrong.html


----------



## Chuffy (10 Sep 2008)

Tetedelacourse said:


> A few predictions:
> 
> He'll ride for Garmin (or whatever Stapleton's team is called by then).


Er, don't you mean High Road?



> Everyone loves heroes and villains. Who you see Lance as depends on your POV. Regardless, if he does ride, it will make for more great headlines either way.
> 
> I wonder if the pie-muncher will come out of retirement!


Hmmm. Not all publicity is good. Cycling needs him like it needs a hole in the head. We're trying to break away from the bad old days, and he most certainly represents them.

Pie muncher? I doubt it. Mind you, Landis and Rasmussen will be free if Lance wants to put a real team of charmers together...


----------



## John the Monkey (10 Sep 2008)

Chuffy said:


> Mind you, Landis and Rasmussen will be free if Lance wants to put a real team of charmers together...


Landis has a pro contract for 2009 already, Chuffy...


----------



## Chuffy (10 Sep 2008)

John the Monkey said:


> Landis has a pro contract for 2009 already, Chuffy...


Events outpace me yet again....

Hmmm, a new team you say? Has Lance decided who he is riding for yet?


----------



## just jim (10 Sep 2008)

Welcome back Lance Putin!


----------



## mondobongo (10 Sep 2008)

Would be ironic a texan winning for a Russian Team.


----------



## roadiewill (10 Sep 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Well, there go Cadel Evans' chances then...




haha thats what I thought... evans must hate this news


----------



## mondobongo (10 Sep 2008)

Loved the response from O'Grady when asked what he thought of armstrong coming back, 'Bring it on'. I think there will be quite a few people who will want to take a chunk out of the texan and will be more than capable of doing it. Something to tell the grandkids I beat armstrong.


----------



## Disgruntled Goat (11 Sep 2008)

Is it me or is this just a ruse by Astana. Buy Armstrong onto the team and they can't possibly be denied a place in the TdeF. Job Done.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (11 Sep 2008)

Chuffstick I meant Stapleton's team, got Garmin and Columbia mixed up - my bad!

Can I ask why people think this will be bad for the sport? I can't honestly see why.

Scenario 1: he doesn't start. Nothing changes in the sport.

Scenario 2: he starts but gets beaten / pulls out. A legend (like it or not) falls. Great headlines, and all Uncle Lance's detractors are warmed by seeing him fall.

Scenario 3: He wins. An incredible comeback (like it or not) after 2 years out of the pro peloton, we get to test the merd out of him for PEDs and the rest of the pros get a "must do better" report!

Scenario 4: He tests +ve. Most of you lot are euphoric. (I wouldn't put my mortgage on this scenario coming to pass).

Lastly, the tour IS a circus regardless, it's undeniable.


----------



## Mortiroloboy (11 Sep 2008)

Oi! Armstrong...No!


----------



## TimDanaher (11 Sep 2008)

Summed up nicely by Lionel Birnie in *Cycling Weekly*

...but even more succinctly by Mortiroloboy...


----------



## John the Monkey (11 Sep 2008)

TimDanaher said:


> Summed up nicely by Lionel Birnie in *Cycling Weekly*


Pretty much spot on, I think.

He's going to attract a crapload of sponsorship though, isn't he? And if they set up a new team, I reckon they could pretty much hire who they want...


----------



## cisamcgu (11 Sep 2008)

I have been pondering on this for some time (at least 6 minutes ) and have come to the following conclusions : Since he has won 7 tours, and has never been caught doping

He either ..
a) has ridden clean, and therefore has no fear of being caught if he rides in 2009 or..
B) has a new, undetectable doping system, and therefore has no fear of being caught if he rides in 2009.

Because if he rides the tour, and gets caught doping then everything he has ever achieved will be tarnished - so he must be *pretty damned sure* that he will not be caught. Armstrong does not take risks !

Just my opinion 


Andrew


----------



## Tetedelacourse (11 Sep 2008)

agreed Andrew.


----------



## John the Monkey (11 Sep 2008)

cisamcgu said:


> I
> He either ..
> a) has ridden clean, and therefore has no fear of being caught if he rides in 2009 or..


The linked Lionel Birnie article above is worth a read.


----------



## mondobongo (11 Sep 2008)

It is a very good article and too be honest not the response I was expecting from the Comic, was expecting them to come out pro armstrong.

Sums up well with that last sentence.
And then, the circus will crank into over-drive. Do us a favour, Lance, you don't need cycling and cycling doesn't need you. Leave the sport to get on with things and get on with your life.


----------



## Chuffy (11 Sep 2008)

Yup, read the article and he's 100% right.

The people who support Lance (as opposed to cycling fans per se) are the same people who will pick Man Utd as their football team of choice. They're not fans of the sport, they just want to be associated with winners. Sadly it seems there are many in the world of pro-cycling who are prepared to roll over and show their belly to the old dog, yet again. It's alpha-wolf syndrome isn't it? If Contador is already saying that Lance can win _and beat him_, then he is a gutless coward and deserves no respect. I hope that there are more like O'Grady who will be queuing up to show Lance that it's over and that he should have stayed away.


----------



## Crackle (11 Sep 2008)

It's 'car crash' cycling at it's best ....... and don't even hint at me being a Man U. supporter 

So cycling has got it's house in order eh! A new regime, new approach, out with the old. 

Lance back and their all diving for cover and queing up to kow tow. It has forever been thus has it not, stop trying to fool yourselves. Only the strong win.

That said, I can't quite believe he'll be up to it at nearly 37. If he's attacked relentlessly, he won't have the recovery anymore. You could see the last few tours he won, he won on strength of personality as much as anything. The explosive power had gone. It'll be a spectacle though.


----------



## Disgruntled Goat (11 Sep 2008)

It would be nice to see the young 'uns tear him a new a-hole


----------



## Tetedelacourse (11 Sep 2008)

What a load of old horse sh1t that article was.

About Basso and Ulrich: *How believable were those athletes? Did Armstrong believe in them? *

Did you all disagree with Armstrong at the time? 

*The 1999 tests yadda yadda yadda. *He got away with it. Do any of you think he'd get away with it in 2009?

*The fact Armstrong beat so many dopers does not prove he doped. But neither does it prove anything about 1999 to 2005 if Armstrong comes back and wins in 2009 while part of the UCI's biological passport scheme. *

So he'd only be competing to dispute those test findings? Bollox. Why would cycling suffer because of this if it was his reason for returning anyway?

*It is typical of Armstrong that he assumes all he need do to march back into the Tour de France is give an interview to Vanity Fair stating it is his intention. *

Ha ha! Risible! Five paragraphs above the writer states that Armstrong has signed up to USADA and can apply to UCI in February! Come off it, the author sounds like a soapboxer.

*The sport has changed so much in the three-and-a-bit years since Armstrong quit. A root-and-branch overhaul is in process. It is proving slow, difficult work, but there is progress. Armstrong's return will turn the clock back. Do we want that? *

Highly debatable. And if he returns, will there be carte blanche to take what you like. Do any of you really think that?

He then states that Armstrong's victories were "charmless, bullying and smug" and that it's been more exciting since he retired. Well we on CC can't agree on that but you'd hardly describe his wins as dull. And anyway the challenge is to win, not to entertain FFS.

The tour is always a circus, a freak show, and if you don't like that then you're a fan of the wrong sport.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (11 Sep 2008)

Chuffy said:


> Yup, read the article and he's 100% right.
> 
> *The people who support Lance (as opposed to cycling fans per se) are the same people who will pick Man Utd as their football team of choice. They're not fans of the sport, they just want to be associated with winners. *Sadly it seems there are many in the world of pro-cycling who are prepared to roll over and show their belly to the old dog, yet again. It's alpha-wolf syndrome isn't it? If Contador is already saying that Lance can win _and beat him_, then he is a gutless coward and deserves no respect. I hope that there are more like O'Grady who will be queuing up to show Lance that it's over and that he should have stayed away.



Do you have any sporting heroes Chuffy? Does that mean you're a fan of winning or a fan of the sport? Can you only be a fan of a sport if you don't support the most successful in that sport? I'm surprised at a comment like that from you.


----------



## Blue (11 Sep 2008)

I think the article from CW is a crock of crap. People want to see the likes of Armstrong. I think he is comming back for a simple reason - he hasn't been replaced since he left. I hope he wins next year.

Competitive cyclists have to remember that the TdF is not just about hard core cyclists. It is a national spectacle watched by millions - many of whom have no great interest in cycling as such. I watched the Tour on TV for about 15 years before I bothered to buy a bike. I know there were many like me.


----------



## Chuffy (11 Sep 2008)

Tetedelacourse said:


> Do you have any sporting heroes Chuffy? Does that mean you're a fan of winning or a fan of the sport? Can you only be a fan of a sport if you don't support the most successful in that sport? I'm surprised at a comment like that from you.


Heroes? No, because hero worship will always blind you to someone's faults and anyway, heroes have a way of letting you down, one way or another. There are people I admire, but heroes? No.
Maybe I was a bit harsh, or generalising too much, but as someone else said on this thread, it's as if some of Lance's fans stopped bothering with the Tour since their man quit. When Liverpool were winning everything (late 70s iirc) oddly enough loads of kids my age made the decision to support...Liverpool. Turn to the 90s and the same happened with Man Utd. Early 00s and Chelski reaped the benefit. Glory hunters and those who only bother with a sport if they can latch onto the alpha-dog (or team) aren't fans of the sport, they just want to boost their self-esteem by hooting 'all u haterz r jus jealous' at anyone who dares challenge the heroic status of their man/team. Happened in F1 with that cheating kraut bastard morally challenged gentleman Michael Schumacher. I don't dispute that there are many who are genuine fans, of Lance, of Schumacher, of Man Utd etc, and who don't have my jaundiced views on heroes, but there are also a great many more who just want the glory.

You've done the homework Tetters, you _know_ how thin the ice is when cycling tries to clean itself up (post Simpson, post Festina, post Landis etc etc). The likes of Armstrong coming back can only make that transformation more difficult.



> He got away with it. Do any of you think he'd get away with it in 2009?


Again, you know the history. Ricco said that he should have been caught many times before he finally was. The dopers will always find ways. Surely you don't believe that the war is won and that no-one can get way with doping? That would be naive, to say the least.


----------



## yello (11 Sep 2008)

Blue said:


> I think the article from CW is a crock of crap.



I found myself nodding in agreement with most, if not all, of it.



> I think he is comming back for a simple reason - he hasn't been replaced since he left.



I don't know what you mean? "Replaced"... there's been a winner every year since his retirement. Do you mean 'Has anyone else established a strangle hold on the event?'. The answer to that is, fortunately, no. Besides LA's reasons for coming back are, I suspect, way more complex and personal than the simple one you offer.

I'm happy to acknowledge LA's supreme talents on a bike, he was a worthy winner, but I doubt, however, that I'd like him. The stories I'd read about his controlling nature in the peleton, the big 'I am' attitude he had (and he still thinks he can do it; put a call in to Sarkozy to make sure he's included! I mean, who does he think he is!!). I don't want to see him back in cycling because the new era is fresh and I don't want him making it stale again. That's why I found myself agreeing in such a heartfelt way with that article.


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

Chuffy said:


> Yup, read the article and he's 100% right.
> 
> The people who support Lance (as opposed to cycling fans per se) are the same people who will pick Man Utd as their football team of choice. They're not fans of the sport, they just want to be associated with winners.



True in most cases, but not on CC. Nearly everyone on here doesn't support Lance, so if they come out saying they do, there pretty brave souls.


----------



## stoatsngroats (11 Sep 2008)

I think that LA returning to the 2009 Tour would be fantastic for world cycling....

I think that the french public would be very upset that he might return to the Tour, and I think he would have strong enough support to achieve greatness again - it would be a really good spectacle.!

I think he never doped, in any way, and that his physiological stature is sufficient to explain his strength, stamina, and ability. Some men can move mountians, others can just write about them...

I'm excited by this news, and I'm not about to argue ANY of the aforementioned beliefs - all of which I hold dearly, and completely un-ironically!

Good Luck Lance....!


----------



## yello (11 Sep 2008)

stoatsngroats said:


> I think that the french public would be very upset that he might return to the Tour



And I think you'd be wrong. MOST French don't know that much about cycling, so would know LA's name but beyond that... they'll turn out to cheer the French riders as they always do.

The French that do know about cycling would, I guess, be divided on similar lines to other nationalities. Don't believe what LA has to say about 'the French' when he only really means some sections of the French media.


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

After thinking about Lance coming back ... I think it's going to make the '09 tour very interesting for the world to see. I am not a Lance supporter, but I am yet to think he doped and if he does make another win then that is some brillance, espeically after so long out of the sport.


----------



## Chuffy (11 Sep 2008)

yello said:


> And I think you'd be wrong. MOST French don't know that much about cycling, so would know LA's name but beyond that... they'll turn out to cheer the French riders as they always do.


We have a 26 year old French chap here on work experience. He had never heard of Jacques Anquetil. Never. That really surprised me. It would be like someone here having never even heard of Bobby Charlton.



> The French that do know about cycling would, I guess, be divided on similar lines to other nationalities. Don't believe what LA has to say about 'the French' when he only really means some sections of the French media.


Heh, those nasty bits of the media who have a habit of printing inconvenient truths? Although given his frog on the end of a cowboy boot t-shirt and his comments about the French football team having tested positive for being 'peanuts' he's going to have an uphill struggle to convince people.


----------



## maurice (11 Sep 2008)

yello said:


> And I think you'd be wrong. MOST French don't know that much about cycling, so would know LA's name but beyond that... they'll turn out to cheer the French riders as they always do.



It depends how you define "don't know much", but I'd say they know more than the British do. The only non-cyclist at work I can discuss the tour with is French (funnily enough he's not a great fan of Armstrong, I can't wait to see his reaction to the news when he gets back off holiday ). 

Also when I toured France the locals knew a fair bit more than here, last year while it was on a hotel manager was complaining that the French didn't dope enough to keep up with the others.


----------



## Cathryn (11 Sep 2008)

I just think it's funny that I'm suddenly supporting Cadel Evans. Never thought that would happen


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

Cathryn said:


> I just think it's funny that I'm suddenly supporting Cadel Evans. Never thought that would happen



_"Step on my dog ... I will cut your head off!"_

I was a big supporter of Valverde in this year's tour, stuck with him from the start to the finish


----------



## Cathryn (11 Sep 2008)

I preferred the Schlek brothers. Could never decide which I fancied most...assuming they put on about four stone.


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

The younger one ... Andy Schlek, he was right at the front of the peloton the whole time pulling everyone along.


----------



## Cathryn (11 Sep 2008)

And he was cute. But they both are.


----------



## mondobongo (11 Sep 2008)

armstrong is not in the Tour yet, Prudhomme/ASO have agreed in principle to him riding. L'Equipe have yet to power up and I feel that once they start things rolling about those test results for the 99 result it could get very nasty.
ASO may find themselves backed into a corner were they have to say 'Non' to retain their credibility.


----------



## maurice (11 Sep 2008)

mondobongo said:


> ASO may find themselves backed into a corner were they have to say 'Non' to retain their credibility.



Could be a spectacular fallout, depends how much the tour needs Nike as their sponsor, can't see Nike even entertaining the idea of losing all that extra revenue Lance would generate for them.


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

Can't see them saying no for the mere fact that it will gather so much coverage and extra revenue just from dear old Lance Incorporated.


----------



## rich p (11 Sep 2008)

Cathryn said:


> I preferred the Schlek brothers. Could never decide which I fancied most...assuming they put on about four stone.



How much do you weigh Catherine?


----------



## yello (11 Sep 2008)

maurice said:


> Also when I toured France the locals knew a fair bit more than here, last year while it was on a hotel manager was complaining that the French didn't dope enough to keep up with the others.



Ok, they know more than the average brit!  Not that that's saying much! 

'Le dopage' & cycling is common joking/comment material here. Similar to all and sundry having an opinion on footballers wages in the UK, it doesn't mean they know any more than they've read in their favourite tabloid.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (11 Sep 2008)

Chuffy said:


> Heroes? No, because hero worship will always blind you to someone's faults and anyway, heroes have a way of letting you down, one way or another. There are people I admire, but heroes? No.
> Maybe I was a bit harsh, or generalising too much, but as someone else said on this thread, it's as if some of Lance's fans stopped bothering with the Tour since their man quit. When Liverpool were winning everything (late 70s iirc) oddly enough loads of kids my age made the decision to support...Liverpool. Turn to the 90s and the same happened with Man Utd. Early 00s and Chelski reaped the benefit. Glory hunters and those who only bother with a sport if they can latch onto the alpha-dog (or team) aren't fans of the sport, they just want to boost their self-esteem by hooting 'all u haterz r jus jealous' at anyone who dares challenge the heroic status of their man/team. Happened in F1 with that cheating kraut bastard morally challenged gentleman Michael Schumacher. I don't dispute that there are many who are genuine fans, of Lance, of Schumacher, of Man Utd etc, and who don't have my jaundiced views on heroes, but there are also a great many more who just want the glory.
> 
> You've done the homework Tetters, you _know_ how thin the ice is when cycling tries to clean itself up (post Simpson, post Festina, post Landis etc etc). The likes of Armstrong coming back can only make that transformation more difficult.
> ...



The point I dispute Chuffy is that if you are/ were a fan of Armstrong then you are not a fan of cycling. Absolute crapola. 

I'll lay my cards on the table, I was a big fan of him until 2004 then I woke up and smelt the longhorns. Before then though, I would certainly have described myself as a fan of pro cycling, as I still do. I also knew that he was to all intents and purposes generally a daffodil, rather than being blinded by his qualities. 

That argument sounds like a tired old "ee I were ere before you younguns came along with your plastic emotions, you don't know what it's like to be a real fan etc etc"

As for his return making the transformation of cycling more difficult, again I ask do you think he will dope and get away with it? I'm not for a second saying that all dopers will be caught next year - you're right I've done my homework - but I do think that LANCE ARMSTRONG will be targeted. 

I also agree with the earlier post along the lines of O'Grady's feelings. 

As far as tour sponsorship goes, if a sponsor leaves, eg Nike, the event is big enough to attract another. It's the most cost-effective marketing opportunity in the sporting world in terms of the ratio of outlay to exposure.

Lastly,  I'd again reiterate that I wont be cheering for Lance next summer if he races (which I don't think he will) but I haven't seen anything here to support the position that if he races it will weaken pro cycling.

That article is tantamount to the author saying "I don't want Lance back in the tour". If CW pays its writers to spout that sort of insight then they might save a bit of cash by looking at the playground for their next swathe of reporters.


----------



## Crackle (11 Sep 2008)

Kovu said:


> Can't see them saying no for the mere fact that it will gather so much coverage and extra revenue just from dear old Lance Incorporated.



Yer reckon. Coca Cola pulled out and they had the tour as one of their top five world sporting events. Do not underestimate the draw of big sportspeople of this world, the Armstrongs, Beckhams, et al.

I really would like Evans to be a better rider as he has the right character. I never liked Big Mig, boring but I always enjoyed the big characters taking the tour, Hinault, Fignon, Delgado, Riise (yes I know, hawks & spits if it makes you happier), Pantani, Roche, Lemond & Armstrong. The tour needs big characters, nay cycling needs them and all the controversy they generate.


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

Yeah Crackle ... he'll add a bit of colour to the tour.

Also like to say that I don't think a guy who has been out of the cycling world would risk coming back if he had a chance of getting caught.


----------



## Crackle (11 Sep 2008)

Kovu said:


> Yeah Crackle ... *he'll add a bit of colour to the tour*.
> 
> Also like to say that I don't think a guy who has been out of the cycling world would risk coming back if he had a chance of getting caught.



It's always colourful, he'll just add more. I was thinking of going again next year anyway, it'll just be a bonus if he's there. Last time I went was his last tour. Loads of Americans were there following him. Fantastic atmosphere, get yourself over one year.


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

Yeah I know what you mean ... but any tour that he rides in there's always gonna be a bit more if you get me? 

If I could I would go over, as soon as money, time and anything else doesn't stop me, I will be there!


----------



## Chuffy (11 Sep 2008)

Tetedelacourse said:


> The point I dispute Chuffy is that if you are/ were a fan of Armstrong then you are not a fan of cycling. Absolute crapola.


I've already qualified what I said. It wasn't intended to be as b/w as you put it. But I stand by the assertion that many Lance fans are fans of Lance the alpha-wolf first and cycling second. Lance is probably the only modern cyclist to attract such 'fans'. 



> I'll lay my cards on the table, I was a big fan of him until 2004 then I woke up and smelt the longhorns. Before then though, I would certainly have described myself as a fan of pro cycling, as I still do. I also knew that he was to all intents and purposes generally a daffodil, rather than being blinded by his qualities.


I started following the Tour (and cycling generally) in 2003. I had no idea who he was or any of the back story. But he struck me as a nasty, arrogant, brash tosser. I remember posting on C+ that he was easier to admire than to like. But that was all. It was only as I started reading more and more, looking into the history of the Tour and the history of drugs in pro-cycling that I started to actually dislike him and what he represented. 



> As for his return making the transformation of cycling more difficult, again I ask do you think he will dope and get away with it?


Do you mean will he dope again and get away with it? He wouldn't be coming back unless he believes that he can.



> I'm not for a second saying that all dopers will be caught next year - you're right I've done my homework - but I do think that LANCE ARMSTRONG will be targeted.


He was before. And so was Ricco. 



> Lastly,  I'd again reiterate that I wont be cheering for Lance next summer if he races (which I don't think he will) but I haven't seen anything here to support the position that if he races it will weaken pro cycling.


This thread is part of that proof. Lance = the Tour, it's a very simple equation and his presence will drown out pretty much anything else. You also have to look at the way he has fought riders who dared to speak out against doping (Bassons) or dared to take the stand against his 'associate' Dr Ferrari (Simeoni). Then there's his support for the likes of Hamilton and Landis. Did he send Rasmussen a bunch of flowers? Maybe not, but he's got a track record of sticking up for the dirty riders against the anti-doping authorities. In an event that's desperately trying to clean itself up he is not needed. His presence simply gives the finger to the authorities trying to clean up cycling and offers *nothing* to that fight other than further tiresome reiterations that he was clean all those years and the anti-dopers are just jealous haterz.




> That article is tantamount to the author saying "I don't want Lance back in the tour". If CW pays its writers to spout that sort of insight then they might save a bit of cash by looking at the playground for their next swathe of reporters.


It's a well reasoned and sensible justification of why the writer doesn't want him back. 

I don't know if you saw the coverage of todays stage of the ToB but there was a part of it that spoke volumes. The piece covered Rock Racing and one fan who, as Ned Boulting told it, spent half an hour chewing his ear off about how bad Tyler Hamilton was and how he shouldn't be there. And then went over to stand by Hamilton to have her photo taken, grinning like a muppet the whole time. And that seems to sum up the reaction of an awful lot of people to Lance's return. I'm just glad that at least one journo is prepared to state the opposite.


----------



## Blue (11 Sep 2008)

yello said:


> I don't know what you mean? "Replaced"... there's been a winner every year since his retirement. .



Yeah, but can the general public name any of them? Just about the whole world seemed to know LA - and that's what I think an event like the TdF wants, in no small measure, from its winners. That's what I was getting at.

I don't see anything wrong with the attitude displayed by LA - that's how you get to set a record for winning the Tour.


----------



## Chuffy (11 Sep 2008)

Blue said:


> Yeah, but can the general public name any of them? Just about the whole world seemed to know LA - and that's what I think an event like the TdF wants, in no small measure, from its winners. That's what I was getting at.


Is that it? Because Joe Public doesn't know who Sastre is we've got to grovel and be grateful that Lance is coming back? What are you going to do if he doesn't race? Have him stuffed and mounted on a motorbike while we all pretend? Champions come along like buses, but sometimes you might have to wait a year or two. 



> I don't see anything wrong with the attitude displayed by LA - that's how you get to set a record for winning the Tour.


He has always behaved like a daffodil in the peloton. Other riders have done their share of bossing the peloton over the years but Lance, off and on the bikes, wins the prize every time. I don't know about you but I like sportsmen to offer a little more _grace_ than that.


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

Chuffy said:


> He has always behaved like a daffodil in the peloton. Other riders have done their share of bossing the peloton over the years but Lance, off and on the bikes, wins the prize every time. I don't know about you but I like sportsmen to offer a little more _grace_ than that.




See this is argueing now on opinion I believe. First of all I will say that I admire Lance, and his attitude I think is arrgoant, too up his own ar** and generally not good. But then again, that is also what makes me think would he have got to the top without that attitude? It's part of who he is ... and i think we can fully admire the cyclist without dragging his personal attitude into the equation. 

I mean what about Phelps?


----------



## Noodley (11 Sep 2008)

OK, let's get to the bottom line: He is a twat.


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

Noodley said:


> OK, let's get to the bottom line: He is a twat.



Noodley wisdom! 

Bottom line: Yeah I'll agree with that!


----------



## Chuffy (11 Sep 2008)

Kovu said:


> I mean what about Phelps?


What about him? Unless I'm very wrong he's just a cocky prat. No crime in that, so is Cavendish. 

Armstrong is definitely a twat, but a thoroughly nasty twat.


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

Phelps i think was convicted of drink driving ... alot was said about it a while ago, and I put myself firmly on his side, simply because i don't think you should drag other stuff in apart from that performance of the person.


----------



## Chuffy (11 Sep 2008)

Kovu said:


> Phelps i think was convicted of drink driving ... alot was said about it a while ago, and I put myself firmly on his side, simply because i don't think you should drag other stuff in apart from that performance of the person.


Right. But that was something totally unconnected with his sport, yes? I wouldn't think any less of a sportsman if they wore their wife's pants, slurped tea from the saucer or had regular sessions of mutual pleasure with the labrador next door. Doesn't matter and I don't care. The way they behave within the sport, that's what matters.


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

Fair enough, but he lost the respect of alot of people because of that. 
I know Lance is a complete and utter twat, he's acted stupidly, he's an arse in the peloton, but that's him. I still admire him as a cyclist. If he turns out to be on drugs, I'll fully accept I was wrong, but i find it difficult to see him taking that risk now. 

But just to clarify I do think he is a twat, but still admire his achievements.


----------



## Chuffy (11 Sep 2008)

Kovu said:


> But just to clarify I do think he is a twat, but still admire his achievements.


That's where I was about five years ago. But I've done a lot of reading and thinking since......

Anyways, I'm off to bed. Don't you have someone to flirt with in the Cafe?


----------



## rich p (11 Sep 2008)

Chuffy, top sportsmen are there for themselves, their egos and their bank balances. They and we shouldn't care if they're nice people to the camera and the mike. We want to watch excellence not Mother Theresas. I too prefer our 'heroes' to be photogenic, amusing, intelligent etc but driven people are rarely like that. The only rule that should stop them participating is cheating and the jury is still out on LA.


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

Chuffy said:


> That's where I was about five years ago. But I've done a lot of reading and thinking since......
> 
> Anyways, I'm off to bed. Don't you have someone to flirt with in the Cafe?



Well originally I didn't like the guy at all when i wasn't interested in cycling, I have gone a different way to everyone else! 

Ohhh no he's annoyed with me now anyways.


----------



## Crackle (11 Sep 2008)

Chuffy said:


> He has always behaved like a daffodil in the peloton. Other riders have done their share of bossing the peloton over the years but Lance, off and on the bikes, wins the prize every time. I don't know about you but I like sportsmen to offer a little more _grace_ than that.



Is this not the crux of the matter, that he's not liked. Read his books, an inkling of what maketh the man is in them. The man is driven in a way that is extremely rare. Selfishness doesn't even cover it and every top sportsman is selfish and driven but he's a cut above them. He's always out to prove something. What and to whom I don't know, I suspect he doesn't either. 

Like every multiple winner before him, he's out psyched every competitor before he's got to the race. Without realizing it they're riding the race in his way. Fools the lot of them. Look already at the comments in the press and here: He's coming back, he's going to win. He's half way there now. Truly incredible, that's what so bloody mesmerising. 

Why did Lemond not beat Hinault the year he could have? Because Hinaults sheer presence made him doubt, made him stop. What made Roche's Giro win so incredible - he defied team orders, was spat on and pushed by the fans for doing so and still won. 

This is all legendary stuff. Like I said before it was ever thus.

Did he dope? Did Merx, Anquetil, Roche, Pantani, Simpson. Does anyone do it now, will they in the future.

Riise; He's admitted it. I still remember the moment he dropped off the front of the group on a climb (Alpe d'Huez?), looked them all in the eye and then just exploded away and no-one followed, never mind the drugs, he'd psyched them in that moment, they'd lost because they couldn't look him in the eye. If you don't understand that, then you don't get it at all.

Yes they should be trying to make the sport clean but it doesn't detract from what's gone before because of the sheer animal effort involved in winning the Tour drugged up or not.


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

Crackle said:


> Is this not the crux of the matter, that he's not liked. Read his books, an inkling of what maketh the man is in them. The man is driven in a way that is extremely rare. Selfishness doesn't even cover it and every top sportsman is selfish and driven but he's a cut above them. He's always out to prove something. What and to whom I don't know, I suspect he doesn't either.
> 
> Like every multiple winner before him, he's out psyched every competitor before he's got to the race. Without realizing it they're riding the race in his way. Fools the lot of them. Look already at the comments in the press and here: He's coming back, he's going to win. He's half way there now. Truly incredible, that's what so bloody mesmerising.
> 
> ...



Said better then I ever could Crackle! I have also read his book, and though struck with the sheer arrogance, I was also caught with his determination, he does seem to constantly be trying to prove something.


----------



## Noodley (11 Sep 2008)

Crackle said:


> 1. Why did Lemond not beat Hinault the year he could have?
> 
> 2. Did Merx, Anquetil, Roche, Pantani, Simpson. Does anyone do it now, will they in the future.
> 
> 3. Riise; He's admitted it.



1. well, you could read about that and find out....too long for a forum reply.
2. yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. And yes, yes.
3. but no remorse and thinks nobody cares....he does not "get it"

Not every pro cyclist dopes. The idea that it is acceptable to do so amongst fans only leads to it continuing...


----------



## Chuffy (11 Sep 2008)

Rich P, Crackle. What I'm talking about is very specific incidents (Bassons, Simeoni) and the way he behaved. I'm not talking about force of personality, or psyching out the peloton. That doesn't bother me, I don't expect nice. But the way he behaved in those two incidents said a great deal more to me than a ghost written biography ever could.


----------



## rich p (11 Sep 2008)

well this winter we could have been discussing how much we hate Cadel, whether Andy Schleck can make the next step, will Bertie be allowed in the TdF and La has given the forum a new lease of twaddle for us all to chew over. Good for Lance I say!!


----------



## Kovu (11 Sep 2008)

rich p said:


> well this winter we could have been discussing how much we hate Cadel, whether *Andy Schleck can make the next step,* will Bertie be allowed in the TdF and La has given the forum a new lease of twaddle for us all to chew over. Good for Lance I say!!



Yes  I'm a supporter of his now. 
I agree Lance has given us all something to discuss and argue over.


----------



## Crackle (11 Sep 2008)

Chuffy said:


> Rich P, Crackle. What I'm talking about is very specific incidents (Bassons, Simeoni) and the way he behaved. I'm not talking about force of personality, or psyching out the peloton. That doesn't bother me, I don't expect nice. But the way he behaved in those two incidents said a great deal more to me than a ghost written biography ever could.



Chuffy, I thought you were talking about whether it was good for the sport. That's what I was addressing. Yes is my answer, not no.

Noodley, it's more complex than that. Yes, I'm accepting what's gone before but I don't accept it should continue, I merely acknowledge that it probably will. 

A long time ago I realized what was going on in top cycling, it made me feel bitterly, bitterly disappointed. I have learned to view it in a different light, re-learned the sheer buzz of adrenaline induced excitment as the key moment of a three week race unfolds in the space of a few seconds. I also have to remember that even on drugs in the best form of my life, I couldn't do a day of TdF riding.


----------



## Noodley (11 Sep 2008)

Crackle said:


> I also have to remember that *even on drugs* in the best form of my life, I couldn't do a day of TdF riding.




And I refer to the previous reply I made (was it on this thread or the Landis thread?) that the notion that there was something superhuman about the TdeF and pro cycling which almost accepted that doping was required for it to be humanly possible only contributes to it's continuation....what about cycling 400km in a day? Is that superhuman? Does it need drugs? Or 1200km in 3 days? Or cycling across America...etc. etc.


----------



## Crackle (12 Sep 2008)

Noodley said:


> And I refer to the previous reply I made (was it on this thread or the Landis thread?) that the notion that there was something superhuman about the TdeF and pro cycling which almost accepted that doping was required for it to be humanly possible only contributes to it's continuation....what about cycling 400km in a day? Is that superhuman? Does it need drugs? Or 1200km in 3 days? Or cycling across America...etc. etc.



I meant that people concentrate on the drugs as if it's what makes the cyclist. They forget that these are top athletes who would be top athletes drugs or not. You're partially right though. I feel an ambivalence to drug taking in cycling which I don't feel towards other sports. I wouldn't go as far as saying it's tacit approval though.


----------



## Noodley (12 Sep 2008)

Crackle said:


> I meant that people concentrate on the drugs as if it's what makes the cyclist. They forget that these are top athletes who would be top athletes drugs or not...



Therein lies the problem IMO. Yes they are top athletes. But many top athletes do not dope. And many top athletes do not win. And there are some top athletes who dope to win...

Here's a name to throw into the mix: Cunego.

IMO he is now riding to his natural ability. Which is impressive. Previously, I think he was riding beyond his natural ability.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (12 Sep 2008)

Arguably Valv.piti too if this season is anything to go by.

I think we all agree that LA is/ was a nasty piece of work, and probably cheated in the past.

Where we disagree is that his return weakens the fight against doping. And how much value to attach to that piece of tat from CW

Chuffy you can be content that the witchhunt is now back on and LA might once again be in the firing line.


----------



## Noodley (12 Sep 2008)

Tetedelacourse said:


> Arguably Valv.piti too if this season is anything to go by.



I would agree with that.


----------



## John the Monkey (12 Sep 2008)

rich p said:


> ... we shouldn't care if they're nice people to the camera and the mike. We want to watch excellence not Mother Theresas.



I don't know about that, RichP. I admired Cuddles' responses to the attacks on Prato Nevosa(?) this year, but his antics in the post race q&a put me right off him, personally. Compare with, say, Frank Schleck and the "one, stupid, little second". Schleck may never win a grand tour, but he'd still be a rider I personally admired more than Cuddles or Armstrong.


----------



## mondobongo (12 Sep 2008)

I think that we actually want both, sporting excellence and that they come across as nice people. Cadel's comments and actions drew a lot of negative press and comment whereas Frank and his 'one stupid bloody second' immediately developed an empathy with fans. 

We want heroes but have been disappointed in the past so many times that now we are liable to carefully analyse all aspects of the rider before giving the nod of approval. armstrong has continued to be analysed after leaving the sport and has gradually lost support. Hence his return has not been met by open arms, his media machine may well be aware of this hence the almost homemade webcam announcement expect a charm offensive.


----------



## girofan (12 Sep 2008)

Armstrong back in the peleton. Uuuuuugggghhhh.


----------



## Blue (12 Sep 2008)

Chuffy said:


> Is that it? *Because Joe Public doesn't know who Sastre is we've got to grovel *and be grateful that Lance is coming back?



No, you don't need to grovel. What you do have to do is appreciate that events like the TdF want people like LA - they draw publicity/crowds/revenue etc. You needn't get shirty with me because I express an opinion.



Chuffy said:


> He has always behaved like a daffodil in the peloton. Other riders have done their share of bossing the peloton over the years but Lance, off and on the bikes, wins the prize every time.



Yeah, he also won the race - which, I thought, was the point of him being there and, to me, proves my point to a great extent.


----------



## Chuffy (12 Sep 2008)

Blue said:


> No, you don't need to grovel. What you do have to do is appreciate that events like the TdF want people like LA - they draw publicity/crowds/revenue etc. You needn't get shirty with me because I express an opinion.


People will come anyway. Were the roads empty in 06, 07, 08? I don't think they were. Next year the Schlecks are going to be big favourites, Contador will probably be back, Cuddles will have a much stronger team, Cav might actually get over a mountain or two and be up for the green jersey. There's going to be plenty of interest/crowds/revenue. A lot of the publicity that Armstrong generates is going to be controversy, rehashing of old arguments and a reminder of the not so good old days. That's not the kind of extra interest that the sport needs. If I sound terse it's because I find this 'yay, he's back and the Tour will get loads of coverage!' argument incredibly simplistic and frustrating.


----------



## John the Monkey (12 Sep 2008)

Blue said:


> No, you don't need to grovel. What you do have to do is appreciate that events like the TdF want people like LA - they draw publicity/crowds/revenue etc.


Undoubtedly somewhat true - I'd imagine ASO and whatever team Mellow Johnny ends up in will be licking their chops at the thought of the extra cash money heading their way. 

It's a bit different to say the the TdeF as an event/spectacle/pinnacle of the cycling calendar wants/needs him though...


----------



## yello (12 Sep 2008)

Blue, the tour was popular both before and after LA. The magic of the tour, imo, is that it transcends individuals. The riders are the players, the play is the important part. There have been many many big players over the years, they've come and gone. Please don't buy into LA's believe of his own self-importance too.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (12 Sep 2008)

Funnily enough Yello that's my POV too. The point is that the tour is big enough and bold enough to "withstand" LA's return. It doesn't put back the fight against doping by a few years. It doesn't do anything to further the cause of a clean LA or a cheating LA. I still fail to understand the grounds for this conclusion. 

It's a bit of an oxymoron really (or whatever the word is). "we (the sport, the fans of the sport, the peloton) don't need him" versus "if he does come back he'll ruin it all". 

OK another question for the worryers: How will his presence in the peloton change doping protocols?


----------



## Blue (12 Sep 2008)

yello said:


> Blue, the tour was popular both before and after LA.



I know. I was a fan/viewer long before the LA era and continued to so be since. I couldn't give a choughs ass if LA rides or not, as such. I just think that he hasn't been replaced and we need a 'cult' figure. Without a new icon, the old one will have to do.

My point, from my original post, was that people want to see the "likes of Armstrong". My point from my subsequent posts was that we haven't seen his like since he left. I think a lot of people watch the Tour for the spectacle as much as the 'race'.

I just enjoy expressing my opinion and I have now done that so I'll say no more on the subject.


----------



## Noodley (12 Sep 2008)

Blue said:


> ....we haven't seen his like since he left...



Yes we have. Landis. He was a cheating twatty bastard as well  But then again he got caught...as you were.


----------



## Blue (12 Sep 2008)

Noodley said:


> Yes we have. Landis.



Nah, he had more personality than LA.


----------



## mr_hippo (13 Sep 2008)

Blue said:


> I know. I was a fan/viewer long before the LA era and continued to so be since. I couldn't give a choughs ass if LA rides or not, as such. I just think that he hasn't been replaced and *we need a 'cult' figure*. Without a new icon, the old one will have to do.
> 
> My point, from my original post, was that people want to see the "likes of Armstrong". My point from my subsequent posts was that we haven't seen his like since he left. I think a lot of people watch the Tour for the spectacle as much as the 'race'.
> 
> I just enjoy expressing my opinion and I have now done that so I'll say no more on the subject.



LA is one of the biggest cults I know!
The Tour is not just about one man - never has been and never will be. It's not just about winners. Think of all the journeymen cyclists who don't have a hope of winning but they are there year after year. 
There is not one icon in the Tour every year but many. Riders who go off on a long, lone break and get reeled in with a few miles to go, riders who crash badly and not only finish the race but go on to finish the Tour.
There are riders we remember, not for winning but for other reasons. Without the aid of Google, what is Giuseppe Guerini remembered for? Who crashed into the French policeman at a finish in Armentières?


----------



## yello (13 Sep 2008)

Blue said:


> Without a new icon, the old one will have to do.



One will come along. The tour has had lean years before!

Tete, you raise a valid point and it's made me think. The tour can withstand LA's ego... no doubt there have been others with similarly over inflated self opinions in the past. I should trust in the tour! You've made me realise that I was primarily being motivated by a dislike of LA. I've changed that stance. I now don't mind whether LA rides or not, I'll watch whoever is there, because I'm watching the tour not any one rider... 

but I reserve the right to smile if he gets his arse kicked!!


----------



## Noodley (13 Sep 2008)

mr_hippo said:


> ...what is Giuseppe Guerini remembered for? Who crashed into the French policeman at a finish in Armentières?



He hit a photographer near the end of the Alpe d"Huez stage in the late 1990s (1999?) but won the stage anyway.

Can't remember the name of the rider in Armentieres, but IIRC it was Jalabert who came out worst from it - his face was fairly smashed up  

And your never mentioned Abdoujaparov's crash


----------



## Tetedelacourse (13 Sep 2008)

yello said:


> One will come along. The tour has had lean years before!
> 
> Tete, you raise a valid point and it's made me think. The tour can withstand LA's ego... no doubt there have been others with similarly over inflated self opinions in the past. I should trust in the tour! You've made me realise that I was primarily being motivated by a dislike of LA. I've changed that stance. I now don't mind whether LA rides or not, I'll watch whoever is there, because I'm watching the tour not any one rider...
> 
> but I reserve the right to smile if he gets his arse kicked!!



cool

I'll be smiling too if he gets ripped next year.


----------



## mr_hippo (13 Sep 2008)

Noodley said:


> He hit a photographer near the end of the Alpe d"Huez stage in the late 1990s (1999?) but won the stage anyway.
> *He was brought down by the spectator Erik the German - L'Alpe d'Huez 1999 *
> Can't remember the name of the rider in Armentieres, but IIRC it was Jalabert who came out worst from it - his face was fairly smashed up
> *Jalabert did come off worse but it was Wilfried Nelissen who collided with Insp Clousseau.*
> And your never mentioned Abdoujaparov's crash


I never mentioned Abou's crash and many other incidents incl. the Robert Millar detour!


----------



## Noodley (13 Sep 2008)

mr_hippo said:


> I never mentioned Abou's crash and many other incidents incl. the Robert Millar detour!



True. 

Nelissen, that's him....completely forgot his name.


----------



## robbowatson (15 Sep 2008)

Just a quick thought, but is Lance being a touch more media savvy than we think? For instance, is he going to use his links with Nike and Trek to perhaps start his own team in time for 2009??

Given the single bloody mindlessness of this bullying Texan (IMO Texan is an insult here, I mean look at Bush he's Texan too!), is it not beyond the realms of possibility???


----------



## Haitch (16 Sep 2008)

robbowatson said:


> Just a quick thought, but is Lance being a touch more media savvy than we think? For instance, is he going to use his links with Nike and Trek to perhaps start his own team in time for 2009??



If Armstrong is coming back to promote his cancer charity work, I would be surprised if he joined an existing team rather than handpick his own riders and designed the team shirts.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (16 Sep 2008)

Anyone remember Tailwind Sports?


----------



## Crackle (16 Sep 2008)

There was another interesting synopsis on the BBC website today.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (16 Sep 2008)

Now that is the sort of reporting I like. Good article.


----------



## Keith Oates (17 Sep 2008)

I'll second that, let's hope other news media can follow suit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## chucky212 (20 Sep 2008)

Here is a video of the mini press conference Lance Armstrong held after the 12 Hours of Snowmass MTB relay race. Talks about "the old generation" etc.

Armstrong interview Sept 14th


----------



## Kovu (24 Sep 2008)

He's Astanta isn't he? It's been said now I think.


----------



## robbowatson (25 Sep 2008)

Indeed it is: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/cycling/7632837.stm

Not sure what I make of it all. Seems like a bit of a media circus to be honest. I don't think he'll do much IMO


----------



## rich p (25 Sep 2008)

I just found this quote from 2005 on Cyclingnews.com. from LA. Never say never!
_
"As to whether Armstrong is contemplating legal action, he said that, "all options are open, it's all on the table" and categorically refused to rule out judicial recourse. As for a possible comeback in 2006, a fed up Armstrong put paid to the talk once and for all today, saying "Sitting here in my chair right now... yeah, I opened up the possibility a couple of weeks ago; I thought 'maybe I need to go back to the Tour for another one'. It seemed like the right answer. But sitting here today, dealing with all this stuff again and obviously it would be the Tour, there is no way I could go to France and get a fair shake, either on the roadside, in the doping control, or in the lab, or in the hotel or in the food or whatever. There's no way I could go back there. We're not going back [to France]. I'm happy with way my career ended, the way it went. I'm not coming back."

"I'm in here dealing with his BS," said Armstrong. "I've got three kids out swimming in the pool, splashing around, screaming my name... I'm sick of this." _


----------

