gb155
Fan Boy No More.
- Location
- Manchester-Ish
Hummmm
Part of me agrees, but then, its a Miracle I didnt die on the bike, the first time, or die before I found cycling etc etc
It´s not about the bike
- Thread starter cameramanjim
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Hummmm
Part of me agrees, but then, its a Miracle I didnt die on the bike, the first time, or die before I found cycling etc etc
oldroadman
Veteran
- Location
- Ubique
During my time in competition, I never tested positive (or non-negative, as they like to say today). Neither did a lot of people who also rode in that period. We got our fair shares of success and suffering. In the end, if everyone is completely clean, or just a little bit naughty, or worse, they all still have to turn the pedals, and a view which I have heard is that all that's needed is a level playing field, where the best still succeed and get the results which keeps the sponsor happy, and ensures a living for another season.
There is the conundrum for the rider, do you let yourself get hammered by better "prepared" riders, or do what you have to do to level the field, or carry on getting battered and hope the others get caught? Because generally they didn't, until recently, but I'm coming to think that the sport is cleaner than it's been for a long time.
Now, Mr Armstrong won his races with dedication to a single cause (when did you ever see him really "perform" in anything other than the TdF, unless for training?), and always arrived at the start of the Tour fully prepared, with a dedicated team, and at a peak of form. Then beat others who may have been "prepared" very well by their medical support. Simple question, is the man a superb athlete (yes), was he at a peak of form and could hold it for three weeks (yes), how did he manage to beat riders who have since admitted their use of illegal methods, whilst remaining totally unsullied (don't know but think about it).
There is the conundrum for the rider, do you let yourself get hammered by better "prepared" riders, or do what you have to do to level the field, or carry on getting battered and hope the others get caught? Because generally they didn't, until recently, but I'm coming to think that the sport is cleaner than it's been for a long time.
Now, Mr Armstrong won his races with dedication to a single cause (when did you ever see him really "perform" in anything other than the TdF, unless for training?), and always arrived at the start of the Tour fully prepared, with a dedicated team, and at a peak of form. Then beat others who may have been "prepared" very well by their medical support. Simple question, is the man a superb athlete (yes), was he at a peak of form and could hold it for three weeks (yes), how did he manage to beat riders who have since admitted their use of illegal methods, whilst remaining totally unsullied (don't know but think about it).
I agree with your 3 point summary of Armstrong's success there oldroadman.
This may sound odd to some (given the drum I bang!) but I actually have no problem in saying that Armstrong was better at those 3 things than his contemporaries. That he raced in an era of 'medical preparation' is perhaps a given (how much he may or may not have been party to encouraging that era is another matter) so I factor that in to my opinion. No, what sticks in my throat about Armstrong is something different entirely.
This may sound odd to some (given the drum I bang!) but I actually have no problem in saying that Armstrong was better at those 3 things than his contemporaries. That he raced in an era of 'medical preparation' is perhaps a given (how much he may or may not have been party to encouraging that era is another matter) so I factor that in to my opinion. No, what sticks in my throat about Armstrong is something different entirely.
