Jump to content

Le Tour De France


Recommended Posts

Bobo, bobo and bobo again. <_< Great cyclists are determined by how they stack up against Armstrong. So far he appears to be el pez pequeño en una charca grande. :lol:

Eddie Merckx is the greatest cyclist of all time and nothing Armstrong did ever came close to being able to surpass the mighty Merckx.

My money is now on Sastre with Klöden second for a second time.

It depends really on if they can drop Pereiro tomorrow and gain about 2 minutes. Based on previous rides and the way Kloden and Sastre road today it is about 70% likelihood. If it does happen it will than come down to the time trail since there will still probably be only seconds between Kloden and Sastre. In a time trail I would think Kloden would have the edge if the gap between them is less than 30 seconds, more than and I don't see it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Yeah, like Armstrong... Pereiro isn't in the Operación Puerto of doctor Eufemiano Fuentes <_<

oh shut up Mikel...yet more crap posts from you, but what else is new......Lance never did drugs, and your little Spanish racers or any of your athletes will NEVER even come close to him :P

@ Faster- Lance definately rivals, if not surpases Merckx in many regards as one of the best cyclists of all times...

Link to post
Share on other sites
oh shut up Mikel...yet more crap posts from you, but what else is new......Lance never did drugs, and your little Spanish racers or any of your athletes will NEVER even come close to him :P

@ Faster- Lance definately rivals, if not surpases Merckx in many regards as one of the best cyclists of all times...

Merckx has won 11 grand tours, has won every classic, 3 world championships, has won both major tour de france warm ups. Merckx has won the triple crown, has won more stages than Armstrong in le tour, was in yellow more days, and is one of only a very few riders to win all three classifications in le tour, including doing it at the same tour. He also never won tactically unlike Armstrong, never relied on a team, won 1/3 of all races he entered and won multiple times more races than Armstrong.

For several years Daniel Marszalek has kept an internationally acknowledged weighed ranking to determine the best cyclists since 1892.[1]The ranking takes the (fluctuating) relative importance of races into account to get a balanced result. In the "overall ranking", 2005 edition, Merckx had almost twice as many points as the second (5.844,80 points vs 3.312,80 points for Bernard Hinault, with 16 other racers totaling more than 2000 pts). He has similar margins in separate classifications for Classic races and Tours, best 5-season and best 10-season rankings, and best individual season overall (including the 6 best individual seasons ever, and seven out of the top ten). As a comparison, Lance Armstrong was ranked 15th with 2090,70 points at the end of his career in 2005.

Goethe and Quintana help me out Mercks or Armstrong

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was referring to only the tour de france.....when it comes to that Lance wins hands down and rivals Merckx no matter what you say

That was my reference point as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was referring to only the tour de france.....when it comes to that Lance wins hands down and rivals Merckx no matter what you say

You said of all time, not of all time in le tour. There is a huge difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You said of all time, not of all time in le tour. There is a huge difference.

of all time when it comes to the tour de france (cycling premiere and most important event)....jeesh you people are so technical it is a shame how you have to spell everything out in order for them to get it :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
of all time when it comes to the tour de france (cycling premiere and most important event)....jeesh you people are so technical it is a shame how you have to spell everything out in order for them to get it :rolleyes:

come on do you really need to play that way?

Americans, they think cycling begins and ends with le tour de france.

Link to post
Share on other sites
come on do you really need to play that way?

Americans, they think cycling begins and ends with le tour de france.

play what way, I say something that you misread...I wasn't aware that was a game....and yes cycling's premier event IS Le Tour de France...and lance IS the premier athlete of this event...

Link to post
Share on other sites
play what way, I say something that you misread...I wasn't aware that was a game....and yes cycling's premier event IS Le Tour de France...and lance IS the premier athlete of this event...

Its not that cut and dry. Armstrong won with a strong team and road extremely tacticly whereas some like Merckx and Jacque just went all out without much help from a team and tried to dominate the race from start to finish. This is why Armstrong only leads one of the 3 major records (though be it most wins in comparison to most stage wins and most yellow jerseys both of which I don't even think he is second in) Armstrong is the best winner of le tour, but the best cyclist in le tour history not likely. And is also why Armstrong never won the green or mountain classifications.

To the Spanish and Italians, would a cyclist from your country care more about winning your own tours or le tour?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Its not that cut and dry. Armstrong won with a strong team and road extremely tacticly whereas some like Merckx and Jacque just went all out without much help from a team and tried to dominate the race from start to finish. This is why Armstrong only leads one of the 3 major records (though be it most wins in comparison to most stage wins and most yellow jerseys both of which I don't even think he is second in) Armstrong is the best winner of le tour, but the best cyclist in le tour history not likely. And is also why Armstrong never won the green or mountain classifications.

To the Spanish and Italians, would a cyclist from your country care more about winning your own tours or le tour?

Lance won SEVEN Le Tour's and therefore is the PREMIER athlete of cycling PREMIER event...it is that cut and dry....and is all that matters at the end of the day no matter how technical or bitchy you, the French, or whoever want to be on the matter.....he is one of a kind, and his accomplishements will always set him aside from all the rest, and that is the last I will say on this

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lance won SEVEN Le Tour's and therefore is the PREMIER athlete of cycling PREMIER event...it is that cut and dry....and is all that matters at the end of the day no matter how technical or bitchy you, the French, or whoever want to be on the matter.....he is one of a kind, and his accomplishements will always set him aside from all the rest, and that is the last I will say on this

You make a great spokesmodel SO. :P You said everything I was thinking.

As an example, Faster. Ron Clarke of Australia was probably the best runner of the 60's. He won EVERYTHING leading up to the '60 and '68 Olympics. But he never won at the Olympics, the premier event of running. So he is largely ignored.

Billy Mills, an unknown runner with few prior wins, won at the Olympics in 1964 and is widely known with his one win.

That's how the Tour is. No matter how you slice it, Lance is the premier cyclist in the arena of public opinion and for his phenominal record in France. And even if the French or this Spaniard who was in the lead wins, and I am sure that all of Europe will crown this new person as the best cyclist ever and Lance as a has been, you can't erase history. B)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Americans are making one big mistake. Cycling is much more than just the Tour de France. Just because it was the only race Armstrong really participated in doesn't mean that makes it the only cycling race worthwhile. There are great races from February till November.

I believe Merkx and Hinault deserve more praise as Tour winners than Lance? Why? Because both of them started their season in February and didn't stop winning races until the season ended in early November. Armstrong's season on the otherhand lasted for only 3 weeks in July. The rest of the year he was preparing for these 3 weeks. Armstrong has won the Tour a record 7 times and kudos to him for that. No one knows how many times Merkx or Hinault would have won it using the same tactics (and strong teammates) but I bet it would have been more than 7.

Furthermore, Le Tour might be Cycling's premier event, it is certainly not cycling's hardest event. The Giro d'Italia (Le Tour's Italian equivalent) is much harder. Italy is a more mountainous country than France. The climbs in Italy are higher and steeper and because the race is in May the peaks are still covered in snow. And last but not least, there are simply a lot more of them. This years Tour is extremely easy with only 5 mountain stages. This years Giro in comparison had 7 Mountain stages.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bobo, bobo and bobo again. <_< Great cyclists are determined by how they stack up against Armstrong. So far Pereiro (and Sastre) appear to be el pez pequeño en una charca grande. :lol:

hello bobito

Armstrong was great,others (that perhaps you don´t know) like Hinault,Merkx and Indurain too.

Is true that Pereiro or Sastre are not in this level ,but they are the best of THIS moment and THIS tour.

If you think that Landis o Hincapie could be another Armstrong you are wrong,Lance was a the exception proves the rule.Perhaps the fact of live and to train in Spain help him...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Faster and (oh) Quintana.

I like to add, that it will be interesting to see Armstrong´s reaction, if Ullrich (No3 last year) and Basso (No2 last year) are found guilty of cheating.

And finally, can someone please explain, why Discovery Channels performence is so poor this year?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with Faster and (oh) Quintana.

I like to add, that it will be interesting to see Armstrong´s reaction, if Ullrich (No3 last year) and Basso (No2 last year) are found guilty of cheating.

And finally, can someone please explain, why Discovery Channels performence is so poor this year?

I think for the same reason that Landis and Leivheimer haven't been able to perform that well since becoming leaders. There seems to be a transition between being a helped to a leader and being a leader and its why so many of TDC castoffs haven't fully found their leadership if they ever had it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You make a great spokesmodel SO. :P You said everything I was thinking.

As an example, Faster. Ron Clarke of Australia was probably the best runner of the 60's. He won EVERYTHING leading up to the '60 and '68 Olympics. But he never won at the Olympics, the premier event of running. So he is largely ignored.

Billy Mills, an unknown runner with few prior wins, won at the Olympics in 1964 and is widely known with his one win.

That's how the Tour is. No matter how you slice it, Lance is the premier cyclist in the arena of public opinion and for his phenominal record in France. And even if the French or this Spaniard who was in the lead wins, and I am sure that all of Europe will crown this new person as the best cyclist ever and Lance as a has been, you can't erase history. B)

hahaha thanks LA :D .......it is pointless arguing this any further, these people will just keep going on wikipedia, etc. to insist that Lance isn't one of the best, when he in fact is and to try to fight against those that try to belittle his HUGE accomplishments with petty and facts/opinions....but again who cares...but when it comes to having won seven tour de france's and the respect of your entire nation or the support of a bunch of trivial, antiamerican Gamesbids posters...I chose the first! :P ....you can't be the best and be liked by everyone, that is just a fact in life...oh well

Link to post
Share on other sites

Discovery Channel were used to listening to Armstrong and following his orders. Armstrong had to win the race and the only job his teammates had was making this possible. Now that Armstrong is gone the others have no idea what to do. They are not used to taking iniative, they don't know how to win a race or how to do well in the classification. They're basically completely lost without Armstrong and simply not good enough.

All Discovery cyclist were initially selected for their helping capabilities. The ones that had the talent and ambition to win races themselves (Hamilton, Landis, Heras, Boonen) left the team once they had the chance, the cyclists that remained were great helpers (without any ambition of winning races themselves) but none of them are winners themselves. The only exception is Savoldelli but he had nothing to do with Armstrong's Tour team. He was only hired to do well in the Giro and has never done well in the Tour anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
hahaha thanks LA :D .......it is pointless arguing this any further, these people will just keep going on wikipedia, etc. to insist that Lance isn't one of the best, when he in fact is and to try to fight against those that try to belittle his HUGE accomplishments with petty and facts/opinions....but again who cares...but when it comes to having won seven tour de france's and the respect of your entire nation or the support of a bunch of trivial, antiamerican Gamesbids posters...I chose the first! :P ....you can't be the best and be liked by everyone, that is just a fact in life...oh well

Why do you always choose to attack people as anti-american every time someone has an opinion that is not in favour of the US? You know damn well that goethe and i aren't anti-americans, you have said it about me numerous times.

Talking about belittling accomplishment, you and LA84 are doing that to many riders that most cycling followers think are better than Armstrong.

LA84 - your example is not valid in the context of Eddie Merckx he has won 5 le tour de france's and 5 giro d'italians and 3 world championships, so he has performed on the biggest stages of his sport. he didn't win an olympic medal because of the no-professionals rule that was still in place during his time.

Even within le tour it is not Armstrong clear-cut the best that ever road. its not like he did something like Jacques Anquetil and have the yellow jersey from the prolodge to paris, its not like he won the most stages, or had the most yellow jerseys, or won by the largest margine, or won any of the other jerseys. He won seven tours which is a huge feet but winning is not just the mark of greatness, its how you win and how you lose, the breadth of your career, the stats, its the sum of everything, not just 7 wins.

Armstrong is a great athlete, a cancer survivor, a good role model to many people, a symbol of hope to those with cancer and a great humanitarian with his live strong campaign, but he is not even in the same breath as Eddie Merckx and he has even acknowledged this in the coverage of le tour over the past few years by OLN.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do you always choose to attack people as anti-american every time someone has an opinion that is not in favour of the US? You know damn well that goethe and i aren't anti-americans, you have said it about me numerous times.

Talking about belittling accomplishment, you and LA84 are doing that to many riders that most cycling followers think are better than Armstrong.

LA84 - your example is not valid in the context of Eddie Merckx he has won 5 le tour de france's and 5 giro d'italians and 3 world championships, so he has performed on the biggest stages of his sport. he didn't win an olympic medal because of the no-professionals rule that was still in place during his time.

Even within le tour it is not Armstrong clear-cut the best that ever road. its not like he did something like Jacques Anquetil and have the yellow jersey from the prolodge to paris, its not like he won the most stages, or had the most yellow jerseys, or won by the largest margine, or won any of the other jerseys. He won seven tours which is a huge feet but winning is not just the mark of greatness, its how you win and how you lose, the breadth of your career, the stats, its the sum of everything, not just 7 wins.

Armstrong is a great athlete, a cancer survivor, a good role model to many people, a symbol of hope to those with cancer and a great humanitarian with his live strong campaign, but he is not even in the same breath as Eddie Merckx and he has even acknowledged this in the coverage of le tour over the past few years by OLN.

whatever Faster discussing this with you is a lsot cause :unsure: ...Lance is still the premiere athlete of cyclings premiere event and that is ALL that matters....and I'll stop calling you anti-american when yous top calling me anti things and refuse to see more than valid points......

Link to post
Share on other sites

One you called me anti-american before i called you anti-french

two you refuse to acknowledge or accept the more than valid points that goethe, quintana and i have put forward.

three if Armstrong wasn't American you wouldn't be debating this with me

and four - Armstrong himself acknowledges that he isn't the greatest, you should too

Link to post
Share on other sites
One you called me anti-american before i called you anti-french

two you refuse to acknowledge or accept the more than valid points that goethe, quintana and i have put forward.

three if Armstrong wasn't American you wouldn't be debating this with me

and four - Armstrong himself acknowledges that he isn't the greatest, you should too

you have accused me of being things before I ever called you antiamerican.....and I could care less what three trivial gamesbids posters who use wikipedia or don't like Lance think about one of the most amazing athletes in the world....again Lance is a premier athletes of cycling for winning it's premier event seven times...and is a ramrkable human being in general...who cares what you three or any bitter French individuals think of him?

Link to post
Share on other sites
you have accused me of being things before I ever called you antiamerican.....and I could care less what three trivial gamesbids posters who use wikipedia or don't like Lance think about one of the most amazing athletes in the world....again Lance is a premier athletes of cycling for winning it's premier event seven times...and is a ramrkable human being in general...who cares what you three or any bitter French individuals think of him?

I have accused you of nothing personally, the play that way comment was about the debate. You in fact have accused me of being bitchy and anti-american.

I also find it funny that you state that you don't care about what three posters have to saw, but in your previous post you said that i fail to acknowledge points you made. trying to have things both ways doesn't work

I guess you missed:

Armstrong is a great athlete, a cancer survivor, a good role model to many people, a symbol of hope to those with cancer and a great humanitarian with his live strong campaign, but he is not even in the same breath as Eddie Merckx and he has even acknowledged this in the coverage of le tour over the past few years by OLN.

My thoughts on Armstrong are not wikipedia material, they are the fact that I watch le tour, read about le tour and in general pay some attention to cycling and its history. In fact I do like Armstrong, his story is amazing, but it doesn't blind him to the truth about his place in canon of cycling history.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...