# Jan Ulrich



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

Will he be known as the man to never beat Armstrong in the TDF?

Will he be coming hard this year?


----------



## bsdc (Feb 15, 2002)

bas said:


> Will he be known as the man to never beat Armstrong in the TDF?
> 
> Will he be coming hard this year?


Yes. And then he'll win in 2006, and no one will be impressed, because we'll all know he only won because Lance wasn't there.


----------



## Kram (Jan 28, 2004)

*On a related note..*

WTF is he doing this year? Has he raced at all?? Once again, I beleive, he'll be "the man to beat" and wind up 2nd, or worse.


----------



## Dan Gerous (Mar 28, 2005)

Kram59 said:


> WTF is he doing this year? Has he raced at all?? Once again, I beleive, he'll be "the man to beat" and wind up 2nd, or worse.


 He did a few races with some not too bad results, and he seems motivated enough... maybe not enough to beat Lance but enough to be better than last year. I just hope the Tour is not as boring as it was last year.


----------



## Jdawg (Dec 6, 2004)

Dan Gerous said:


> He did a few races with some not too bad results, and he seems motivated enough... maybe not enough to beat Lance but enough to be better than last year. I just hope the Tour is not as boring as it was last year.


All indications thus far lead me to believe that Lance is as unmotivated as he has ever been since becoming a pro (for whatever that is worth) and Jan is said to be in as good a shape as he has been in for the last 10 years. His life long coach has said he is fit like he was in 97. 

We shall see. I have a feeling Lance is doing the same thing he does every year, and just like every year, no ones "in the know" arent believing it.


----------



## deastin (Jun 24, 2004)

I for one hope Jan does something a little different this year. Maybe attack Lance in the first week and try to put some time into him or at least test the Disco boys and see how strong they really are. Every year it just seems like Jan is sitting back and waiting for some signal or sign to go and it never comes. If Jan dosnt mix it up we all know what will happen, Lance gets babysat for 2 and a half weeks then wins a few stages in the mountains and claims his 7th yellow jersey. Lance looks a bit out of it right now but I firmly believe he ll be ready when the Tour starts (no I m not a LA lover or anything be he IS the champ until he get beat). I m just hoping for a different tour this year, some real fireworks, real attacks and GC contenders having to do some real riding and not just coming in with the pack. I ll be disappointed like usual I m sure.
Deastin


----------



## STinGa (Mar 15, 2003)

*Strategy is the key*

I am a LA fan, not a fanatic, but a fan. IMO, the way to beat him is to start pushing the pace from the prologue...and hard. You can't wait for him to have a bad day and then try to beat him then. He won't have a bad day. Was it three years ago when it looked like he was suffering, and then dropped dayam near everyone off of the map? He needed an Oscar for that run up the mountain.

Indurain had everyone scared for four years before someone decided to push the pace and saw that he was actually human and vulnerable. The other riders were scared to fight 'Big Mig'. With LA, several teams will have to work together, taking turns at the front and just flat out run Discovery ragged. This should allow one of the other teams' captains to move into the spotlight. If only one or two teams try to push the pace, I think Discovery will be able to keep LA in the hunt. Three to 1 is a key factor in battle, four to 1 even better.

Jan's camp is saying the same thing this year as the past two years. I expect the same results.


----------



## magnolialover (Jun 2, 2004)

*First of all...*



bsdc said:


> Yes. And then he'll win in 2006, and no one will be impressed, because we'll all know he only won because Lance wasn't there.


First of all, you can only beat the people that are at the race. Regardless of whether or not Armstrong rides the race is a moot point really. You race against you is there. Not who isn't there. If Ullrich wins in 2006, then he still wins the biggest bike race in the world. End of story. For a second time. If he wins this year, he still wins the biggest bike race in the world, once again, regardless of who or who isn't there. 

Armstrong isn't going to win this year. He'll make it close, but he's already won 6 in a row. I don't think he cares anymore, and hell, neither would I. He's on parade right now.


----------



## bsdc (Feb 15, 2002)

magnolialover said:


> First of all, you can only beat the people that are at the race. Regardless of whether or not Armstrong rides the race is a moot point really. You race against you is there. Not who isn't there. If Ullrich wins in 2006, then he still wins the biggest bike race in the world. End of story. For a second time. If he wins this year, he still wins the biggest bike race in the world, once again, regardless of who or who isn't there.
> 
> Armstrong isn't going to win this year. He'll make it close, but he's already won 6 in a row. I don't think he cares anymore, and hell, neither would I. He's on parade right now.


I've got nothing against Jan. He's a tremendous cyclist. He's arguably the second best cyclist in the world. I guess I really feel sorry for him. He probably deserves better for all the effort he has put out. 

Some people think Lance isn't motivated this year and maybe he isn't. But I remember everyone thinking he wasn't motivated last year and that he was distracted by his divorce and his new relationship with Sheryl Crow. If there is one thing Lance knows, it's how to peak in July. He doesn't fatten up in the winter. He comes in looking a little weak in the early races. Everyone starts to think maybe Lance has cracked and then he dominates the Tour de France. It's happened year after year, and I don't have any reason not to expect it this year. He's a competitive person. He owes it to his new sponsor to win one more time in the Discovery Channel jersey. He's going to want to come out on top. He's going to want to have two more wins than anyone else has ever had.


----------



## magnolialover (Jun 2, 2004)

*If Jan is #2?*



bsdc said:


> I've got nothing against Jan. He's a tremendous cyclist. He's arguably the second best cyclist in the world. I guess I really feel sorry for him. He probably deserves better for all the effort he has put out.
> 
> Some people think Lance isn't motivated this year and maybe he isn't. But I remember everyone thinking he wasn't motivated last year and that he was distracted by his divorce and his new relationship with Sheryl Crow. If there is one thing Lance knows, it's how to peak in July. He doesn't fatten up in the winter. He comes in looking a little weak in the early races. Everyone starts to think maybe Lance has cracked and then he dominates the Tour de France. It's happened year after year, and I don't have any reason not to expect it this year. He's a competitive person. He owes it to his new sponsor to win one more time in the Discovery Channel jersey. He's going to want to come out on top. He's going to want to have two more wins than anyone else has ever had.


So if Jan is #2 who is the number 1 cyclist in the world?? If you tell me Armstrong, I'm going to have to laugh at that answer.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

magnolialover said:


> So if Jan is #2 who is the number 1 cyclist in the world?? If you tell me Armstrong, I'm going to have to laugh at that answer.


In the modern era (which apparently started about 6 years ago) a few things have become apparent.

One of which is that the Tour de France is the only race that matters, and therefore determines the "best" cyclist.

Please pay closer attention


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

*No*

Having the best legs is what matters in a GT, you only need to worry about strategy if you're not the strongest in the TT and mountains. None of the protagonists are going to do anything crazy and waste their energy until they find out their form in the TT and mountains.


----------



## jankty (Sep 27, 2004)

*It's been touted before*

_Indurain had everyone scared for four years before someone decided to push the pace and saw that he was actually human and vulnerable. The other riders were scared to fight 'Big Mig'. With LA, several teams will have to work together, taking turns at the front and just flat out run Discovery ragged. This should allow one of the other teams' captains to move into the spotlight. If only one or two teams try to push the pace, I think Discovery will be able to keep LA in the hunt. Three to 1 is a key factor in battle, four to 1 even better_

The spanish teams were talking big about doing this in 2002, but they simply ended up just trying to hang on to Heras and Armstong's wheels. Also, the sprinter teams work hard enough in the opening stages for the all important win to eleviate the GC teams from having to defend or control (too much) for the first 10 days. The problem with Jan attacking is that LA rides in the mountains like a climber, able to change pace constantly, where Jan cannot and therefore has to power-ride people off his wheel. Should be a good tour nevertheless.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

When push comes to shove every team rides for their own interest. Teams aren't going to "gang-up" on Armstrong if it means potentially losing a podium spot, especially if it becomes obvious they are riding for second.


----------



## carlos (May 26, 2004)

the only way to beat armstrong is not loosing any time on the prologue, individual time trial and team time trial. lance is not that outstanding on the mountains anymore, he doesnt have that explosive attack from 2001 for exemple.


----------



## jankty (Sep 27, 2004)

*LA in the Mtns*

You could be right about not being explosive in the mountains anymore. But last year he didn't really need to show it. The speed that he and Basso went up the climbs was unreal and Basso was still far enough behind, no need to attack him But he did explode for a few sprint wins and his display up the Alpe was truly "outstanding." I hope this years race is one where he will be required to attack in the mountains; that will prove it one way or another.


----------



## Angelracer (Dec 12, 2004)

We'll have to wait for a new wave of motivated cyclists to join the tour


----------



## bsdc (Feb 15, 2002)

magnolialover said:


> So if Jan is #2 who is the number 1 cyclist in the world?? If you tell me Armstrong, I'm going to have to laugh at that answer.


I said "arguably" because I was recognizing that one could argue this subject endlessly. My point is the Tour de France is thought by many to be the pennicle of bicycle racing. It's generally thought to be the toughest bicycling race in the world. It attracts most of the best cyclists in the world. There are other great races and I agree that one can argue a number of different cyclist are #1.


----------



## Asiago (Jan 28, 2004)

*well duh*



magnolialover said:


> So if Jan is #2 who is the number 1 cyclist in the world?? If you tell me Armstrong, I'm going to have to laugh at that answer.


Well, duh, it is Armstrong.

Think of it this way. Since the Lemond era, what have all the very top (and even some trully great second rung) cyclists done? They target the Tour. Period. All the greatest cyclists have targeted the Tour. If you don't think this is true, then you are watching a different sport. Sure, you can argue Bettini the past couple of years, but again, you have to remember that earlier in his career he thought he might have a chance to contend for GT titles. When it turned out that he could not (lacking TT and high mtns), _then  _ he turned to 1 day races.

And for the last 6 years, all the greatest cyclists in the world at their absolute peak in form show up for this three week race in France. And every year for the last 6 years Armstrong has handed them their collective @rses.

You can complain about him riding only half a season, and you have a legit gripe, but that does not take from the fact that he is most definitely the best cyclist.


----------



## moving up (Feb 18, 2003)

deastin said:


> I for one hope Jan does something a little different this year. Maybe attack Lance in the first week and try to put some time into him or at least test the Disco boys and see how strong they really are. Deastin


Not really possible with the mass sprint finishes which typically dominate the first week. Are you thinking he might try a break away? Disco would surely cover it and Jan would burn himself out and end up dropped badly in the mountains. He will have to cover Lance and a handful of other likely leaders and make the break on the mountains and TT's. His team definitely has it in themselves to win this thing if they organize. I continue to worry that Kloden is going to cause trouble by trying to lead which will only frustrate Jan's chances. On the other hand, Jan's almost single handed performance with Bianchi when he was going back for his own water bottles makes me think he can crush Kloden if he wants to. Especially interesting are the two stages going into Germany which might really spark up Jan and the boys.


----------



## dagger (Jul 22, 2004)

*Agreed*



 Asiago said:


> And for the last 6 years, all the greatest cyclists in the world at their absolute peak in form show up for this three week race in France. And every year for the last 6 years Armstrong has handed them their collective @rses.



yeah...like Asiago says


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Hardly. Cipollini was as dominant a sprinter as Armstrong has been at the Tour, Museeuw was as dominant in the classics. Cycling is unique in that different riders with different characteristics can compete in the same sport but excel at different aspects. Lance is only the best if the GC in the Tour de France is your only measuring stick.


----------



## bsdc (Feb 15, 2002)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Hardly. Cipollini was as dominant a sprinter as Armstrong has been at the Tour, Museeuw was as dominant in the classics. Cycling is unique in that different riders with different characteristics can compete in the same sport but excel at different aspects. Lance is only the best if the GC in the Tour de France is your only measuring stick.


Well, lets compare the incomes of Cipollini and Museeuw or anyone else in professional cycling to Armstrong. The point is GC in the TdF is the most prestigous win in all of cycling and Arstrong has done it more than anyone else in history.


----------



## Asiago (Jan 28, 2004)

*true, but*



Dwayne Barry said:


> Hardly. Cipollini was as dominant a sprinter as Armstrong has been at the Tour, Museeuw was as dominant in the classics. Cycling is unique in that different riders with different characteristics can compete in the same sport but excel at different aspects. Lance is only the best if the GC in the Tour de France is your only measuring stick.


Yep, Cipo is a better sprinter, Museeuw better over the cobbles. But now you are trying to compare riders with _VERY SPECIFIC _ qualities (of the highest degree, no doubt), to a rider that can sprint (TdG '04, TdF '04), can ride one-day races (LBL, Amstel) can TT, and can climb.

What makes the TdF (and the other GTs) such a great measuring stick is the fact that in order to win a GT, you _*MUST*_ be able to do it all, except for maybe sprint, and Armstrong can sprint.

Love him or hate him. He is the best. And the *only* people who don't seem to think Armstrong is the best, don't ride in the pro peloton.


----------



## carlos (May 26, 2004)

do you ride on the pro peloton by the way? 

sure, any pro rider can ride a classic race, but only a few can win. and lance couldnt.
armstrong invested in sprints training last year because he knew he couldnt attack guys like hamilton or ullrich on the mountains. i think he was jus as surprised as us about mayo,hamilton and ullrich form last year. 

but i think he can win any race on the world, but only if the race starts in july.


----------



## nwilkes (Jun 21, 2004)

carlos said:


> armstrong invested in sprints training last year because he knew he couldnt attack guys like hamilton or ullrich on the mountains. i think he was jus as surprised as us about mayo,hamilton and ullrich form last year.


hardly.
hamilton himself said the pace on all terrains was so hard it preempted any attacks he would have tried. 
ullrich/kloden at their best were not as good as LA, as evidenced by a complete lack of stage wins & the ADH TT. with the caveat that ullrich looked sick throughout the race. and don't give me the LA was babysat thing because K & U had each other the whole way, and were never off of azevedo's wheel until LA decided they needed to be dropped. Ace paced U and K as much as the rest of those guys.

goes without saying the only guy that LA couldn't really attack decisively in the mountains was Basso.

what seems interesting to me is that LA seems to have changed from a climber who favors punctuated attacks (like Mayo in the Pyrenees) to just setting a high tempo and relying on attrition. it seems like this would make him vulnerable to riders who are extremely focused on tempo (ullrich). if ullrich stays healthy it could get more suspensefull than usual.


----------



## Asiago (Jan 28, 2004)

*ha-ah, no*



carlos said:


> do you ride on the pro peloton by the way?
> 
> sure, any pro rider can ride a classic race, but only a few can win. and lance couldnt.
> armstrong invested in sprints training last year because he knew he couldnt attack guys like hamilton or ullrich on the mountains. i think he was jus as surprised as us about mayo,hamilton and ullrich form last year.
> ...


No, I don't ride the pro peloton, far from it. What does that have to do with this discussion? I'm saying he's the best.

"sure, any pro rider can ride a classic race, but only a few can win. and lance couldnt"

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Lance has won classics: Fleche Wallonne and he won a World Cup: San Sebastian and finished 2nd in no less than 4 other World Cups and 3rd in at least one more. The argument that Lance can't ride one day races, Classics, what were the world cups, or the mother of all one day races, the World Championships, is just pure bunk.

Now we're slammin' Armstrong for investing in sprint training (which I don't agree with you that he did) so that at the end of a high mountain stage he could outsprint a competitor if necessary? Good grief, that's really lame.


----------



## Bianchigirl (Sep 17, 2004)

I think that your assertion that everyone in the pro peloton asserts that Armstrong is the greatest is way off the mark, too - unless it's a peloton made up of Tommy D clones...


----------



## magnolialover (Jun 2, 2004)

*Full agreement...*



Bianchigirl said:


> I think that your assertion that everyone in the pro peloton asserts that Armstrong is the greatest is way off the mark, too - unless it's a peloton made up of Tommy D clones...


I couldn't possibly agree more with this statement. If you guys actually think that the pro peloton think Armstrong is the best, go back to the statement that Pelizotti (sp??) made a few weeks ago. Paraphrasing here, he said something along the lines of, "The only person in the peloton who likes Armstrong is Basso". I think that says a lot about someone. And Armstrong is not the best rider in the world. He's the best Tour de France rider, and for the month of July for the past 6 years, he's wreaked havoc on the Tour de France field. Do I criticize him for this? Nah, not possible. It's what his sponsor wants, and it's what the so-called cycling fans in the USA understand. I do seriously think most European fans, and some American cycling fans, actually understand the sport, and follow the sport. To see who is currently best in the world, take a look at the world rankings. That's all you have to look at. And it's not Armstrong. A great cyclist. Yes. The best? Nope, not even close.


----------



## Rolando (Jan 13, 2005)

*My money is on Jan*

The best ending to the tour this year would be for Jan to win it with Armstrong a close second. How can anyone not want Jan to do it this year! I'm actually a big fan of Lance and even I want him to lose to Jan.

The tension throughout the race would be incredible if you had Armstrong riding a close second. Then you'd see what he's got under the hood! 

Hope Jan can do it. This is the year of all years for sure.


----------



## Asiago (Jan 28, 2004)

*You are missing the point here*



magnolialover said:


> I couldn't possibly agree more with this statement. If you guys actually think that the pro peloton think Armstrong is the best, go back to the statement that Pelizotti (sp??) made a few weeks ago. Paraphrasing here, he said something along the lines of, "The only person in the peloton who likes Armstrong is Basso". I think that says a lot about someone. And Armstrong is not the best rider in the world. He's the best Tour de France rider, and for the month of July for the past 6 years, he's wreaked havoc on the Tour de France field. Do I criticize him for this? Nah, not possible. It's what his sponsor wants, and it's what the so-called cycling fans in the USA understand. I do seriously think most European fans, and some American cycling fans, actually understand the sport, and follow the sport. To see who is currently best in the world, take a look at the world rankings. That's all you have to look at. And it's not Armstrong. A great cyclist. Yes. The best? Nope, not even close.





Bianchigirl said:


> I think that your assertion that everyone in the pro peloton asserts that Armstrong is the greatest is way off the mark, too - unless it's a peloton made up of Tommy D clones....


Yo Bianchi Girl and Magnolia, we're not talking about a popularity contest here. I never said Lance was loved by the whole peloton. That's a whole different story. We're talking about who's the BEST cyclist. I know you two don't like him. That's fine. But that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that he's the best cyclist.

As for the argument that Lance is the best only because he races half the season and peak's for only one 3 week club ride around France is bogus. That's like saying Michael Jordon wasn't the best basketball player when he was sitting out with an injury or Tiger Woods during his run of winning 4 majors in a row wasn't the best golfer in the world during tournaments in which he was not participating.

If you are the best, you are the best, and the fact that you are not competing at the time is irrelevant.

Love him or hate him, Lance is the best cyclist right now. I like him, but he's not my favorite. As for his place in history, well, we'll see. It can be argued that he's the best Tour de France rider of all time, but he's definitely not the best cyclist of all time and definitely not the best grand tour rider of all time.


----------



## Rolando (Jan 13, 2005)

*After Jan Wins*

Following his victory at the Tour, he should do the Vuelta, sending a clear message that the new man to beat races all the GT's.

Next year he should go for the triple. He's got nothing to lose and that would be a way of letting the other riders know where they can challenge the New Boss. A rider who just focuses on the tour in this case would be seen as a weasel.


----------



## jankty (Sep 27, 2004)

*6 in a row!*

Who cares if other riders don't like LA, they certainly respect him for his cycling results. And now we are suddenly downplaying the validity of winning the Tour? How come so many Spanish and Italian riders say they would want to win Le Tour over their national race? Cuz the tour is the top. 

Let's just pretend that Ale-Jet, Cipo or Boonen won Paris-Roubaix, MSR or the Worlds for 6 straight years. You would say that rider is no doubt one of the best in the world (not neccesarily THE best) and would obviously have the respect of the peloton for those results. 6 straight years is now fluke.

This argument is getting old and the knee-jerk hatred of LA by some is tiresome and becoming perhaps clinical. You don't have to like him and can certainly root against him, but give him his props for winning.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Armstrong hasn't won a one-day race since he became as stage-racer. I think, although he may have won the Classique des Alpes? He's never even been close in a monument. You can't take results from 10 years ago and say that is what makes Armstrong the best today. 

To be a sprinter you've got to outsprint "sprinters", not make it to the top of a hill first on a hard circuit where most of the other sprinters have been washed out and then essentially hold your spot on a downhill finish, or outsprint a bunch of other non-sprinters on a mountain finish.

Museeuw was as dominant (actually more so) in his focus on the classics than Armstrong was in his focus on GTs (well really just the Tour, but his 4th in the Vuelta gets him some points). Maybe Armstrong is ranked as high as Museeuw amongst GT specialists as the latter was among classic specialists after last year. I'll see if I can find the analysis.

Maybe you're right 
At the end of last year, based on an objective ranking based on points assigned to significant races, Lance is indeed the "best" active rider, ranking 19th all time (up from 21st the year before). He was the 4th best rider of the year behind Bettini, Cunego and Freire. He still ranks behind other "modern-day" riders Indurain, Jalabert and Rominger. Although if he wins the tour again, or does pretty good he should overtake them.

Separate analyses for "Classics" riders vs. GT points, shows Museeuw to be ranked 6th all time, Armstrong isn't even in the top 12 for GT.


----------



## Asiago (Jan 28, 2004)

*you are right, but...*



Dwayne Barry said:


> Armstrong hasn't won a one-day race since he became as stage-racer. I think, although he may have won the Classique des Alpes? He's never even been close in a monument. You can't take results from 10 years ago and say that is what makes Armstrong the best today.
> 
> To be a sprinter you've got to outsprint "sprinters", not make it to the top of a hill first on a hard circuit where most of the other sprinters have been washed out and then essentially hold your spot on a downhill finish, or outsprint a bunch of other non-sprinters on a mountain finish.
> 
> ...


Ah Dwayne, I knew I could count on you for some good argument rather than vitriol.

You are right that he hasn't won a classic in 10 years, and no, he's never won a monument. But his palmares clearly shows he can race 1 day races if he wanted to. While peaking for the Tour he comes 2nd a couple of times in Amstel Gold, and was clearly the rider of LBL in 2003, he just was a bit over confident! He also nabbed 3rd in Zurich during this time too. But the Tour is like riding a World Cup race EVERY day.

What analysis are you citing?

I'm as ticked as the next person that Lance doesn't target the entire season. I was really, really hoping that next season he'd ride all season and skip the Tour. 

I still think though, that if you dominate the Tour like Armstrong has, you simply are the best. Put him on the cobbles of Northern France with Boonen and Lance is left far behind. Put him on the straight of Via Roma with Ale Jet and Armstrong is a mere speed bump. But put Armstrong on any type of road race that is not pan-flat or flat with cobbles (hills with cobbles okay) and Armstrong can compete. Not that he _will_ compete.

Thanks for the post DB, it's nice to see someone else put forth a valid argument. Even if I don't agree! 

Ride on!


----------



## Utah CragHopper (May 9, 2003)

Asiago said:


> But his palmares clearly shows he can race 1 day races if he wanted to.


Laughable B.S. You are measured by what you do, not what you could do. You can't give credit to someone who can't find it in himself to train for and race the classics simply because you think he could win if he wanted to. The only fact is this: When Armstrong did concentrate on the one day races he got a WC and a few minor wins. Museuuw is hardly shaking in his boots with the thought people will consider Armstrong a better one day racer than he is.

You sound like a fan of Roy Jones Jr. saying he was the the best pound for pound boxer ever, but not mentioning that he was content to fight bums rather than step up and fight someone with a pulse.


----------



## Asiago (Jan 28, 2004)

*You're so lame*



Utah CragHopper said:


> Laughable B.S. You are measured by what you do, not what you could do. You can't give credit to someone who can't find it in himself to train for and race the classics simply because you think he could win if he wanted to. The only fact is this: When Armstrong did concentrate on the one day races he got a WC and a few minor wins. Museuuw is hardly shaking in his boots with the thought people will consider Armstrong a better one day racer than he is.
> 
> You sound like a fan of Roy Jones Jr. saying he was the the best pound for pound boxer ever, but not mentioning that he was content to fight bums rather than step up and fight someone with a pulse.


Whatever dude. You don't get it, that's okay.


----------



## Utah CragHopper (May 9, 2003)

Asiago said:


> Whatever dude.


Whatever. We wouldn't want the facts of what LA accomplished in one day races to get in the way of your fantasies about what could have been.


----------



## soulsurfer104 (Jun 30, 2003)

*detour*

interesting how we have gone from talking about Jan's chances at the Tour to talking about how Lance is a poser to talking about professional boxing....

anyway, i love Lance and i think he deserves the win because he works way, way harder for it than anybody else- but i want Jan to rip his legs off this year. Lance has won SIX TIMES, and that's enough for anybody. i have hated Jan in the past because of his laziness during the off-season and his fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants racing style, but somehow i want to see him win this year.

Allez Jan!!!


----------



## Utah CragHopper (May 9, 2003)

soulsurfer104 said:


> i have hated Jan in the past because of his laziness during the off-season


Jan has always showed up at the Tour in excellent condition, so who is to say that what he does in the off season is wrong. Perhaps he is the type of guy that needs the a break to mentally recharge and prevent burn out. The type of year round training regimen that works for Armstrong may not be right for someone with a different mindset like Ullrich. His real problems seems to be a high susceptibility to getting sick and dislike of cold weather, which seems to affect his training.

I like the way he has been talking lately. He seems more focused and motiviated, wants to continue racing for several more years, and wants to do the Giro. This is opposed to 2003 when he was saying he would have retired if he had won the '03 Tour. It would be cool if he did win the Tour this year and attempted the Giro-Tour double next year.


----------



## magnolialover (Jun 2, 2004)

*Ok*



Asiago said:


> Yo Bianchi Girl and Magnolia, we're not talking about a popularity contest here. I never said Lance was loved by the whole peloton. That's a whole different story. We're talking about who's the BEST cyclist. I know you two don't like him. That's fine. But that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that he's the best cyclist.
> 
> As for the argument that Lance is the best only because he races half the season and peak's for only one 3 week club ride around France is bogus. That's like saying Michael Jordon wasn't the best basketball player when he was sitting out with an injury or Tiger Woods during his run of winning 4 majors in a row wasn't the best golfer in the world during tournaments in which he was not participating.
> 
> ...


Okey dokey. Let's take a look at the latest world rankings and see where your golden boy sits right now shall we?? Umm, Lance old boy is not even on the rankings list for 2005 as of yet. These are of course based on the ProTour which Armstrong hasn't even finished a ProTour event as of yet. This will change I'm sure post Tour de France. So just going on the rankings provided to me right now, Lance Armstrong is NOT the best rider right now of 2005. Nor was he the best rider of 2004, as he finished that year ranked 4th in the world. Hey, a good placing, but not THE BEST, as you so loudly proclaim. If he was the best, he would have been number 1 at the end of 2004, and he'd be #1 right now. But he's not even listed. These are the facts, this is not anything based upon opinion.

Just for the record, go back and look at any of my previous posts, and nowhere do I say that I don't like Lance Armstrong as a cyclist. I think he has provided some great performances over the years, and he's had a hell of a career which will come to an end this year. I also think that he's done a lot, just through winning le Tour, for cycling in the United States as a whole. There are people that I work with who didn't know people actually raced bicycles a few years ago, and now when I go onto the manufacturing floor they ask me if I think that Lance can win #7 this year. I like him as a cyclist. I'm just saying, and stating the fact, that he's not the best. I couldn't possibly care less that he only peaks for the le Tour. As I mentioned in my previous post, if you had bothered to read it, is that I don't begrudge him that at all as most people will point out. Winning le Tour is what his past and present sponsor wants him to do, and he's delivered for 6 years running now. Good for him. This doesn't make him the best. He is certainly the best Tour de France rider ever. This I will give him. He does have certain holes in his racing results, which have been hashed and re-hashed many different times so I won't do it again. Best at the Tour de France? Yes. The best riding right now? Nope.


----------



## Bianchigirl (Sep 17, 2004)

I was responding to the implication that only the pro peloton could truly judge Armstrong's 'greatness'...


----------



## bender (Oct 13, 2004)

Everything I have heard about Jan says he is an incredible person off the bike. 

Interesting how in his books, Lance talks about how Jan acts very nice to him, even hugging him. And Jan doesn't say negative things about Lance. I think that says alot for Jan. And Lance sure thought of him as opponent number one. 

I pulled for Lance last year but was dissapointed Jan didn't make the podium. I would not be dissapointed to see Jan win it this year with Lance not far behind. And I hope that if it happens Lance takes it as well as Jan has.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

soulsurfer104 said:


> anyway, i love Lance and i think he deserves the win because he works way, way harder for it than anybody else-
> QUOTE]
> 
> Where does this come from? I don't think any of us know who works the hardest or if working the hardest is the road to success. Maybe Lance wins because he has better talent, maybe he wins because he doesn't work so hard or over-work (look at his typically lean racing schedule) in the lead up to the Tour, maybe he wins because he works smarter, maybe he wins because his off-seasons starts in August. This is pure myth or at least speculation that he wins because he works harder. Like I've said before, if Armstrong died of cancer or never raced again, everyone would be talking about how Ulrich trains so hard, etc. since he would have won the tour 4 or 5 times by now.


----------



## Asiago (Jan 28, 2004)

*Oh*



Bianchigirl said:


> I was responding to the implication that only the pro peloton could truly judge Armstrong's 'greatness'...


My mistake there. But my point is that when the pro peloton chimes in on Armstrong's status as racer (not as nice guy), they put him at the top. It's folks not in the peloton that say he's [email protected] 'cause he "only" races this one race in July so he's not proving anything.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*and then, no and then and then NO and then*



Dwayne Barry said:


> soulsurfer104 said:
> 
> 
> > anyway, i love Lance and i think he deserves the win because he works way, way harder for it than anybody else-
> ...


----------



## Asiago (Jan 28, 2004)

*That's totaly legit*



magnolialover said:


> Okey dokey. Let's take a look at the latest world rankings and see where your golden boy sits right now shall we?? Umm, Lance old boy is not even on the rankings list for 2005 as of yet. These are of course based on the ProTour which Armstrong hasn't even finished a ProTour event as of yet. This will change I'm sure post Tour de France. So just going on the rankings provided to me right now, Lance Armstrong is NOT the best rider right now of 2005. Nor was he the best rider of 2004, as he finished that year ranked 4th in the world. Hey, a good placing, but not THE BEST, as you so loudly proclaim. If he was the best, he would have been number 1 at the end of 2004, and he'd be #1 right now. But he's not even listed. These are the facts, this is not anything based upon opinion.
> 
> Just for the record, go back and look at any of my previous posts, and nowhere do I say that I don't like Lance Armstrong as a cyclist. I think he has provided some great performances over the years, and he's had a hell of a career which will come to an end this year. I also think that he's done a lot, just through winning le Tour, for cycling in the United States as a whole. There are people that I work with who didn't know people actually raced bicycles a few years ago, and now when I go onto the manufacturing floor they ask me if I think that Lance can win #7 this year. I like him as a cyclist. I'm just saying, and stating the fact, that he's not the best. I couldn't possibly care less that he only peaks for the le Tour. As I mentioned in my previous post, if you had bothered to read it, is that I don't begrudge him that at all as most people will point out. Winning le Tour is what his past and present sponsor wants him to do, and he's delivered for 6 years running now. Good for him. This doesn't make him the best. He is certainly the best Tour de France rider ever. This I will give him. He does have certain holes in his racing results, which have been hashed and re-hashed many different times so I won't do it again. Best at the Tour de France? Yes. The best riding right now? Nope.


Hey, you got a legit argument that becuase Armstrong isn't #1 in the UCI that he's not the best cyclist. Who was the number 1 at the end of last season? Cunego. That must mean you think Cunego is the best cyclist in the world, right? Get these two racers at the top of their 2003 forms and Cunego will beat Armstrong? Of course, Cunego could well be the future! I can't wait for the Giro!

Yes, I get your argument as to why you don't think Armstrong is the best. You've seen my argument on le Tour and what I think it means of a cyclist who wins it, regardless of what else they do that season. We disagree. That's fine. At least you have a valid argument.


----------



## EpicX (Mar 11, 2002)

*try some anger management*

no one is having fantasies here but you dude. someone makes a statement that lance can't compete in one day races and that he hasn't ridden well in one since he started winning the tour. someone else posts facts that disprove that statement and you get your panties bunched up. High placings in amstel and LBL show that he IS or at least CAN be competitive in these races. you seem to be implying that if he can't win the race, he might as well not be there. hmmm, lance seems to think that too and then people like you go off on the guy for that.

you want to see how the fanboy favorite "squeaky clean" tyler hamilton posts results on his site?

2004
• 1st overall Tour de Romandie
• 1st stage Tour de Romandie
• 2nd overall Dauphine Libere
• 2nd 2 stages Dauphine Libere
• 2nd stage Veulta al Pais Vasco
• 3rd stage Tour de Romandie
• 4th stage Tour de Romandie
• 5th prologue Tour de Romandie
• 8th stage Tour de Romandie
• 8th stage Critérium International
• 8th stage Veulta al Pais Vasco
• 8th stage Paris-Nice
• 9th Liege-Bastogne-Liege
• 9th stage Veulta al Pais Vasco
• 10th stage Critérium International
• 12th overall Critérium International


allllll the way down to 12th place finishes! you see this on pro site after pro site. WTF? but lance gets 2nd in a couple of major races in recent years and its irrelevant guess he's having fantasies of what could have been, but you'll suck it up since it's tyler.

i was just wondering if Lance slept with your mom? did he steal your USPS contract? did he just spank you bad in a race? you are really bitter about this man.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*The big big picture*



EpicX said:


> no one is having fantasies here but you dude. someone makes a statement that lance can't compete in one day races and that he hasn't ridden well in one since he started winning the tour. someone else posts facts that disprove that statement and you get your panties bunched up. High placings in amstel and LBL show that he IS or at least CAN be competitive in these races. you seem to be implying that if he can't win the race, he might as well not be there. hmmm, lance seems to think that too and then people like you go off on the guy for that.
> 
> you want to see how the fanboy favorite "squeaky clean" tyler hamilton posts results on his site?
> 
> ...


Sometimes when we all feel impassioned as it were about a topic, we all need to step back.

Lets take a differing view. Lance pretty much knows that he can win multiple TDF's and make a whole bunch of money and prestige doing it. Lets face it, the one day races prestige factor DOES NOT EXIST when compared to winning a GT

Next, lets take a look at what factors we all recognize when it comes to success. Money, prestige and lots of naked women in your bedroom. Well, looks like Lance has the bases covered in most if not all of the above. I really have no idea as to his score card with the ladies and really have no wish to know.

Lastly, how about the folks who just dont have any of the above and continue to moan and p1ss about how things are just unfair.....I hang my head in shame because what we have is rather sad. We have people with, NO MONEY, NO PRESTIGE and NO MULTIPLE NAKED LADIES IN THE BEDROOM.I think we can all answer the real question here. How does Lance sleep at Night? The answer:

ON TOP OF A PILE OF MONEY WITH LOTS OF NAKED LADIES.

Personally, I have no real personal interest in the man as long as he is not tapping the Mrs. Personally, I dont see a problem....


----------



## Jdawg (Dec 6, 2004)

carlos said:


> the only way to beat armstrong is not loosing any time on the prologue, individual time trial and team time trial. lance is not that outstanding on the mountains anymore, he doesnt have that explosive attack from 2001 for exemple.


Did you watch the 03 Tour? Did you watch the MTT in 04?

Just our of curiousity, what makes you think he is not strong in the mountains? It couldn't possibly be by lack of stage wins? Think back to stages 14, 15, 16 and 17 last year.


----------



## Utah CragHopper (May 9, 2003)

Asiago said:


> That must mean you think Cunego is the best cyclist in the world, right? Get these two racers at the top of their 2003 forms and Cunego will beat Armstrong?


The only way to objectively tell is by actual accomplishment not some coulda, woulda, shoulda guessing. In 2004 Cunego's accomplishments > LA accomplishments. So were Bettini and Friere's.

I'm sure that your Tour GC metric for determining greatness will come as quite a surprise to Brits. Who would have thought that Sean Kelly wasn't a truly great cyclist. Zero wins in the Tour? Gosh, what a putz.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*Ahaaaaaaaaa*



Utah CragHopper said:


> The only way to objectively tell is by actual accomplishment not some coulda, woulda, shoulda guessing. In 2004 Cunego's accomplishments > LA accomplishments. So were Bettini and Friere's.
> 
> I'm sure that your Tour GC metric for determining greatness will come as quite a surprise to Brits. Who would have thought that Sean Kelly wasn't a truly great cyclist. Zero wins in the Tour? Gosh, what a putz.



Oh I see, its not Great enough for Great Brits??????

Look lets just face it, as alot of folks are stating here, without context, the argument is useless. Again, we have to get a common ground as to what success means. THEN, we can proceed. As I recall, Sean made his woman wait until after a race so he was not distracted by the "exertion" of his good wife. While Sean was a fantastic rider, an incredible descender on the mountains, he did indeed need to work on his priorities in regards to keeping his woman happy.

Personally, I think the man had issues...Just like everyone else


----------



## Bianchigirl (Sep 17, 2004)

Ullrich needs to win the prologue and remember what it feels like to have the Yellow Jersey on his back.

Also, don't underestimate the effect that that devastating stage 15 in the Alps in 1998 had on him - he lost 9' to Pantani on one climb in the wet (the same weather that Armstrong has always relished - at least until this season...). Like Beloki's crash, it must have had quite a shattering effect psychologically - and then in 1999 Armstrong pretty much did the same thing again...

That stage 15 in 1998 was the last time he had the coveted jersey - and I think he needs to feel its effects again, to remember that he is capable of winning the race.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*what Jan needs*



Bianchigirl said:


> Ullrich needs to win the prologue and remember what it feels like to have the Yellow Jersey on his back.
> 
> Also, don't underestimate the effect that that devastating stage 15 in the Alps in 1998 had on him - he lost 9' to Pantani on one climb in the wet (the same weather that Armstrong has always relished - at least until this season...). Like Beloki's crash, it must have had quite a shattering effect psychologically - and then in 1999 Armstrong pretty much did the same thing again...
> 
> That stage 15 in 1998 was the last time he had the coveted jersey - and I think he needs to feel its effects again, to remember that he is capable of winning the race.



Jan needs to stop feeling sorry for himself. COME ON in 1998 you hurt my feelings and so in 2005, some 7 years kater, he just isnt feeling confident yet. What a greasy bucket of monkey spunk that is. 

What is next, 2050, Jan in a walker loses YET AGAIN because, back in 1998, (52 fvcking years ago) he hurt my feelings. No, Jan is not that kind of a loser. THANK GOD.

The hard cold truth is the same folks who say, yeah, Lance has no real one day race victories are the same whiners who root for Jan for the TDF which HE LOST for 1999(I was wrong here, wrong wrong wrong. I am a bad person. I was wrong Jan was not there in 99), 2000, 2001, 2003 and 2004. So, yeah, it has to be that hurtful moment in 1998. WRONG WRONG WRONG. Make up your minds, the TDF is the ultimate indicatyion of victory, OR One day races show the real racer or as most would see, Jan has blown it and he cant go back.

Oddly enough, one only covets what one desires. One desires only what has value. I wonder what race has that coveted jersey. Why bless my soul its the TDF.


----------



## Bianchigirl (Sep 17, 2004)

ttug, what an extraordinary response - particularly considering that Armstrong didn't actually ride in the 1998 TdF, let alone win it (it was Marco Pantani who inflicted that crushing defeat on Ullrich) - best to fact check before you start with the knee jerk Armstrong defense wouldn't you say?

Obviously you don't agree that there is a psychological aspect to sport - gosh, better tell all those sports psychologists then...


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*read please*



ttug said:


> Jan needs to stop feeling sorry for himself. COME ON in 1998 you hurt my feelings and so in 2005, some 7 years kater, he just isnt feeling confident yet. What a greasy bucket of monkey spunk that is.
> 
> What is next, 2050, Jan in a walker loses YET AGAIN because, back in 1998, (52 fvcking years ago) he hurt my feelings. No, Jan is not that kind of a loser. THANK GOD.
> 
> ...


I never stated Armstrong rode in 98. 

I stated that Jan had his feelings hurt in 98.

Learn to read and move on.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*detail please*



Bianchigirl said:


> ttug, what an extraordinary response - particularly considering that Armstrong didn't actually ride in the 1998 TdF, let alone win it (it was Marco Pantani who inflicted that crushing defeat on Ullrich) - best to fact check before you start with the knee jerk Armstrong defense wouldn't you say?
> 
> Obviously you don't agree that there is a psychological aspect to sport - gosh, better tell all those sports psychologists then...


I never stated Lance rode in 98. You have to actually read. Of course, I did not do a stellar job of inserting into every statement that hey, this is not a pro lance argument. I actually thought that the concept of a elite athlete having issues that cause him some lack of focus on a loss 7 years ago is in fact a crock of mule muffins. As to sport psychologists, I dont see them in the yellow Jersey. Of course they do not covet, they are still upset over the forced breast feeding they got at 2 months of age. I guess they never got over that either?????

I do not like Lance Armstrong. However, if a liking or fandom of Lance Armstrong is what causes you deep resentment or trouble as to the Geist of cycling,,,,,,I LOVE LANCE. Yeah baby, LANCE LANCE LANCE. 

Why dont we give Jan a yellow Tele tubby? Thats the only yellow he has deserved in the last 7 years. OH MY GOSH, better watch the fvck OUT, Jan could get an emotional trauma and never ride again. Imagine the race. Phil, Ullrich has stopped riding on the Aple. Dear God Paul is it his knee? No. His stomach, No. His quads? No. Its his ego. oh fvck the race is over for Jan.........


----------



## nwilkes (Jun 21, 2004)

Bianchigirl said:


> Ullrich needs to win the prologue and remember what it feels like to have the Yellow Jersey on his back.
> 
> Also, don't underestimate the effect that that devastating stage 15 in the Alps in 1998 had on him - he lost 9' to Pantani on one climb in the wet (the same weather that Armstrong has always relished - at least until this season...). Like Beloki's crash, it must have had quite a shattering effect psychologically - and then in 1999 Armstrong pretty much did the same thing again...
> 
> That stage 15 in 1998 was the last time he had the coveted jersey - and I think he needs to feel its effects again, to remember that he is capable of winning the race.


i doubt JU has a psychological block. he was competing with both barrels blazing last year and withstood a hellacious onslaught from CSC and postal and Kloden and apparrently the stomach flu. if Armstrong hadn't won so many TDFs the real story would be the consistency of JU placing on the podium so often. JU is a legendary rider who I relish watching, but he is just outmatched on so many levels by Disco/LA.


----------



## Bianchigirl (Sep 17, 2004)

'my tyre burst/brakes blew/it was the kid on the side of the road with the carrier bag/I was dehydrated because I warmed up in the heat/he didn't wait for me blah blah blah'

Monkey boy lover, your boy Lance is _king_ of the whining excuse. 

I posited my own theory which you took for fact and are now spouting as if it's true all over this forum. How very silly. I assumed it might provoke some argument and discussion as a theory - sadly, it's obviously so dark when you disappear up your own arsehole that you can't see anything beyond your own blinkered vision.

Sorry to reply in kind as I really abhor this kind of personal bollox.

As for your hatred for Ullrich - why not get over it and move on?


----------



## Spinnerman (Oct 21, 2004)

*Points system might be a little*

arbitrary as well, but it is at least based on some measuring stick. What I would like to see is the top 10 $$ or (Euro) winners from last year. Sponsors want their teams to be productive and to promote their sponsorship and it does help if their riders win some extra cash and get paid more for entering a race. I think the top rider should be determined by the amount of money he wins in races because the bigger the cash payout, the better the field of riders is likely to be. I've looked on the internet when I read this thread and could not find the info, does anyone have it? 

Thanks


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*spot on reply!*



Spinnerman said:


> arbitrary as well, but it is at least based on some measuring stick. What I would like to see is the top 10 $$ or (Euro) winners from last year. Sponsors want their teams to be productive and to promote their sponsorship and it does help if their riders win some extra cash and get paid more for entering a race. I think the top rider should be determined by the amount of money he wins in races because the bigger the cash payout, the better the field of riders is likely to be. I've looked on the internet when I read this thread and could not find the info, does anyone have it?
> 
> Thanks


Thats about right. Of course, (wary of sarcasm) who would ever use such a materialistic yard stick as MONEY to determine success. About anybody.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Spinnerman said:


> arbitrary as well, but it is at least based on some measuring stick. What I would like to see is the top 10 $$ or (Euro) winners from last year. Sponsors want their teams to be productive and to promote their sponsorship and it does help if their riders win some extra cash and get paid more for entering a race. I think the top rider should be determined by the amount of money he wins in races because the bigger the cash payout, the better the field of riders is likely to be. I've looked on the internet when I read this thread and could not find the info, does anyone have it?
> 
> Thanks


I've never got the impression that prize money was all that big of a consideration. Mostly whether a team does a race or not seems to depend on how much (and where) media exposure it provides for their sponsors.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*I think we are saying the same things*



Dwayne Barry said:


> I've never got the impression that prize money was all that big of a consideration. Mostly whether a team does a race or not seems to depend on how much (and where) media exposure it provides for their sponsors.


IMO More exposure for a sponsor, provides incentive to other sponsors. Its a perceived forgone opportunity for more publicity for another sponsor. The result, more sponsors and more bucks. At least, thats a strong possibility. IMO.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

ttug said:


> Thats about right. Of course, (wary of sarcasm) who would ever use such a materialistic yard stick as MONEY to determine success. About anybody.


Well that would make Michael Schumacher the best sportsman in the world by a long shot (maybe Tiger is close to him?).


----------



## Spinnerman (Oct 21, 2004)

*And I think that is where the UCI is missing the*

boat with the pro tour concept. 

Seems to me that prize money would be a better way to award points because then it would encourage race organizers to compete against each other to attract top riders and teams based on the prize money available. The bigger the potential purse, the more top teams and riders will come out for any given race. Then you don't need an arbitrary Pro Tour of races that are categorized as pro tour events because the prize money and exposure will be the determining factor in attracting the best teams and riders to a race. 

As it is right now, there is the potential for some of the regional races to eventually cancel their events in the next few years because they aren't able to secure TV rights. Where under my concept, for example, a Spanish team might decide to ride a local stage race even though the prize money is a little less because there will be less travel costs, better local exposure for the sponsor and the costs of traveling to an event in another county for a similar race might negate the increased prize money. Yet, this local race will still be able to secure TV rights and exposure for the teams sponsors. 

Teams will look at costs, sponsor exposure for their target market and potential prize money in determining their race program for the year. The best riders will gravitate to the teams that will compete in the best races because that is where they will earn their presitge, exposure and ranking points. 

Maybe this is concept that bicycle racing is not ready for yet. It just seems so simple and obvious and completely off the point that started this thread, but is an interesting concept to consider.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*Well said*



Spinnerman said:


> boat with the pro tour concept.
> 
> Seems to me that prize money would be a better way to award points because then it would encourage race organizers to compete against each other to attract top riders and teams based on the prize money available. The bigger the potential purse, the more top teams and riders will come out for any given race. Then you don't need an arbitrary Pro Tour of races that are categorized as pro tour events because the prize money and exposure will be the determining factor in attracting the best teams and riders to a race.
> 
> ...


I think thats an excellent point and I agree. 

By the way, I was wrong in another thread about Jan and the TDF in 1999. I have to let you know that because if I dont accept my error, I will become a bad bad person.

Back to what you were saying, I think the same will be true throughout any country in Europe much less the US.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*yes, but Lance wins and Jans a loser*



Bianchigirl said:


> 'my tyre burst/brakes blew/it was the kid on the side of the road with the carrier bag/I was dehydrated because I warmed up in the heat/he didn't wait for me blah blah blah'
> 
> Monkey boy lover, your boy Lance is _king_ of the whining excuse.
> 
> ...



Yeah, Lance does whine too. BUT, he wins, Jan loses so Lance is great and Jan sucks. Is that too complicated for you?

(The above was sarcasm about Jan, but Lance is still the winner)


----------

