# Explain the psychology behind Lance haters and Jan-fans.



## patchito (Jun 30, 2005)

Yes, I know, it's inevitable. We'll always have those that resent the guy at the top. But what is it that we admire in our sports heroes? As with Cub or Red Sox fans, sometimes people identify with futility and are loyal to their adopted teams in spite of failure. "The Cubbies might be a bad team, but they're MY team." 

I think some people identify athletes who exhibit style or panache irrespective of accomplishment. Other's might admire those athletes who perform at the highest level and do it quietly....the John Stockton's of the world.

What kind of perplexes me is the legion of Jan fans. Yeah, he's a talented rider, and if you had to pick a cycling hero other than Lance, there haven't been to many that have stuck around in recent years ceppin for Jan, but still, is he really worthy of admiration? Between ploughing through bike racks in a drunken stupor, partying it up on X, coming to the Tour underprepared and overeweight, and just downright sucking at the critical moments, it seems the guy's the perfect example of squandered ability. Yet, still he's got rabid fan base....why?


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

patchito said:


> Yes, I know, it's inevitable. We'll always have those that resent the guy at the top. But what is it that we admire in our sports heroes? As with Cub or Red Sox fans, sometimes people identify with futility and are loyal to their adopted teams in spite of failure. "The Cubbies might be a bad team, but they're MY team."
> 
> I think some people identify athletes who exhibit style or panache irrespective of accomplishment. Other's might admire those athletes who perform at the highest level and do it quietly....the John Stockton's of the world.
> 
> What kind of perplexes me is the legion of Jan fans. Yeah, he's a talented rider, and if you had to pick a cycling hero other than Lance, there haven't been to many that have stuck around in recent years ceppin for Jan, but still, is he really worthy of admiration? Between ploughing through bike racks in a drunken stupor, partying it up on X, coming to the Tour underprepared and overeweight, and just downright sucking at the critical moments, it seems the guy's the perfect example of squandered ability. Yet, still he's got rabid fan base....why?


For the American anti-Lance crowd, I suspect it's not so much anti-Lance, as anti-Lance fan reaction. They don't like to see other people display what they see as hero-worship.
If you've been disallusioned with the human race in general, there's some security in never setting yourself up for disappointment. When someone comes along that reaffirms people's people's faith in human achievement, you need to see the hero knocked down to reaffirm your own disallusionment. Otherwise, you risk coming to grips with the possibility you've been wrong all along.
And Lance's continued success is impossible for the average Joe to identify with. Most of us want success, but don't have the drive or available resources to achieve the continued and high profile success he has. 

For myself, I trained many more hours than any other member of my team. My coach told me so. I weighed 130 lbs, 80% of that was in the legs, yet I saw other riders start training after me, train less than me, and still progress to a level I never could. I had to face my limitations. I never won a race. My best finish was a top ten in a cat V race. But since I believe my motivations were fairly honorable, for the enjoyment and personal challenge, I'm still riding knowing I'll never attain even the lowest level of glory. I've seen many talented riders lose interest. They attained some level of success with minimum effort and were spared constant failure. Yet they lost interest. I can't blame them if in their heart, cycling just didn't raise their spirits.

Outside of Germany, I really don't think their are many genuine rabid Jan fans. They just grab onto Jan as their best available anti-Lance figure. If it wasn't Jan, it would be someone else. The French simply don't like Lance personally. They loved and still love Greg Lemond, despite his fued with Hinaut. It could be because he raced on a French team and went out of his way to adopt some of their ways and customs, while Lance flaunts a strictly American personna. There's not much chance he'll retire to mix into some small French village. 
That's how I see it anyways.


----------



## Frank Tuesday (Jun 1, 2002)

Why Anti-Lance???

There is an old saying, "It isn't whether you win or lose, it is how you play the game." Frankly, I don't like the way Lance plays the game. I have the utmost respect for him as a human, as a survivor and in his athletic ability, but I have absolutely none for him as a racer. he is essentially contesting one race this year. He may have participated in a few others, but he didn't mount any serious attempt to win. Others may disagree with me, but IMHO, no single race is better or more important that others. The Tour doesn't mean more to me than the Giro, the Vuelta, Paris-Roubaix, or any other race on the Pro Tour and many races not on the pro tour. 

There is the feeble argument that the Tour is the best because the best riders do the tour. How do they get to be the best? By doing well in the tour. It is a completly circular argument which holds absolutely no validity. Has Lance gone to the Giro and tried to win? The Veulta? The last time a rider made a serious attempt at both was pantani in 1998, and he won the Tour by a greater margin against the "better riders". 

Give me a racer over a TdF specialist anyday. I'll take Vino, DiLuca, Zabel or a hundred other riders who may not win the tour, but will fight for victories from spring to fall.


----------



## lamazion (Sep 11, 2004)

Frank Tuesday said:


> he is essentially contesting one race this year.


Unfortunately LeMond developed this model, and Indurian followed the model to 5 tour victories. The contenders of the modern tour are following this model. Gone are the days when a rider will be competitive through the entire season


----------



## Squint (Jan 22, 2004)

*necessity*

The top riders are so close together in ability that if none of them focus on the Tour and race year-round, no one has an advantage and the rider who is 0.5% better will win. But if one or more of them decide to specialize in the Tour then they'll have the advantage. That's what it takes to win the Tour and hardly anyone will remember DiLuca or Vinokourov 5-10 years from now. Hell, it took me several hours trying to remember who was 2nd in the 1999 TdF and I follow the sport closely.


----------



## nwilkes (Jun 21, 2004)

The anti-lance fan reaction is a big part. Even deeper and more fundamental is that cycling fans can be really elitist. No doubt this has appealed to me. The sport is difficult, misunderstood by most and at the very fringe of what many people will pay attention to. Then because of LA, your Sunday ride is inundated by hairy legged yahoos in US Postal kits who have no control over their brand new Trek Madones. And to boot the price of various gear goes sky high - component shortage my a$$. 

Jan Ullrich offers at once both an antagonism towards these new fans as well as something erudite and foriegn (two traits close to cyclists it seems). I like Ullrich too and without him the TDF would be legitimately boring.
As for me I could care less if LA rides more or less than the TDF. I just enjoy being able to see bike races on the TV; the more the better. I won't slight Van Petegem for only contesting races before May or Heras for lighting up the Vuelta and sucking wind every other month of the year. That being said my favorite riders are the ones who can never be counted out of an attack regardless of the conditions - like my boy Flecha. Still I will enjoy watching all of them ride. IMHO.

/Apologize if this is repeated from above.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

Frank Tuesday said:


> Why Anti-Lance???
> 
> There is an old saying, "It isn't whether you win or lose, it is how you play the game." Frankly, I don't like the way Lance plays the game. I have the utmost respect for him as a human, as a survivor and in his athletic ability, but I have absolutely none for him as a racer. he is essentially contesting one race this year. He may have participated in a few others, but he didn't mount any serious attempt to win. Others may disagree with me, but IMHO, no single race is better or more important that others. The Tour doesn't mean more to me than the Giro, the Vuelta, Paris-Roubaix, or any other race on the Pro Tour and many races not on the pro tour.
> 
> ...



If no single race is more important, why is the Giro or the Vuelta (which he raced and finished 4th) more important for him to race than any of these???

2004
1st Tour de France, six stage wins including the Team Time Trial
1st Tour of Alrgarve stage win, 5th overall
1st Tour de Georgia, two stage wins
1st Midi Libre stage win, 6th overall
3rd Criterium International
4th Dauphine Libere
23d Tour of Murcia

2003 
1st Tour de France, two stage wins including the Team Time Trial
1st Dauphine Libre, one stage win
8th Amstel Gold
20th Liege-Bastogne-Liege
8th End of year world ranking

2002 
1st Tour de France, four stage wins
1st Midi Libre
1st Dauphine Libre, one stage win
2nd Criterium Internantional
3rd Championship of Zurich
4th Amstel Gold
6th San Francisco Grand Prix
2nd End of year world ranking

2001 
1st Tour de France, four stage wins
1st Tour of Switzerland, two stage wins
2nd Amstel Gold
2nd Classique des Alpes
8th Setmana Catalana
12th Tour of Aragon
4th End of year world ranking

2000 
1st Tour de France, one stage win
1st GP Eddy Merckx 2-man TT with "Eki" Ekimov
1st GP des Nations
2nd Paris-Camembert
3rd Dauphine Libere, one stage win, King of the Mountains winner
3rd Olympic Time Trial
3rd Classique des Alpes
4th GP Gippingen
7th GP Miguel Indurain
13th Olympic Road Race
4th End of year world ranking

1999 
1st Tour de France, four stage wins
1st Dauphine Libere stage win, 8th overall
1st Circuit de la Sarthe stage win
1st Route de Sud stage win
2nd Amstel Gold
2nd Ride for the Roses criterium
7th Tour of Aragon
7th End of year world ranking

1998 
1st Tour of Luxembourg, one stage win
1st Rheinland Pfalz Tour
1st Ride for the Roses criterium
1st Cascade Classic
2nd First Union Invitational
4th USPro Championship
4th Tour of Holland
4th Vuelta Espana
4th World Time Trial Championship
4th World Road Race Championship
25th End of year world ranking

1997 Lance joins Team USPS

1996 
1st Fleche Wallone
1st Tour DuPont, five stage wins
1st Fresca Classic stage win
2nd Paris-Nice
2nd Liege-Bastogne-Liege
2nd GP Eddy Merckx
2nd Tour of Holland
4th Leeds Classic
4th GP Suisse
6th Olympic Time Trial
8th GP Harelbeke
11th Milan - San Remo
12th Olympic Road Race
14th San Sebastian Classic
17th Amstel Gold
9th End of year world ranking

1995 
1st stage win Tour de France, 36th overall
1st San Sebastian Classic
1st Tour DuPont, three stage wins
1st Paris-Nice stage win
1st West Virginia Mountain Classic, one stage win
1st Tour of America race series
2nd Thrift Drug Classic
5th CoreStates USPro Championship
6th Liege-Bastogne-Liege
15th End of year world ranking

1994 
1st Thrift Drug Classic
2nd Tour DuPont, one stage win
2nd Liege-Bastogne-Liege
2nd San Sebastian Classic
7th Tour of Switzerland
7th World Road Race Championship
25th End of year world ranking

1993 
1st World Road Race Championship
1st Tour de France stage win
1st CoreStates USPro Championship
1st Trofeo Laigueglia
1st Thrift Drug Classic
1st Tour of Galicia
1st West Virginia Mountain Classic, two stage wins
1st Tour of America series
* Winner of $1 million Thrift Drug Triple Crown
2nd Tour DuPont, one stage win
3rd Tour of Sweden, one stage win
5th Leeds Classic
9th Paris-Nice
14th Championship of Zurich
21st End of year world ranking

1992 
1st First Union Grand Prix
1st Thrift Drug Classic
1st Trittico Premondiale second leg
1st La Primavera Tour, three stage wins
1st Settimana Bergamasca stage win
2nd Championship of Zurich
8th Coppa Bernocchi
12th Tour DuPont
14th Tour of Galicia, one stage win
14th Olympic Road Race
17th GP Teleglobe
* Signed with Motorola following Olympics

1991 * Signed with Subaru-Montgomery
1st US Amateur Championship
1st Settimana Bergamasca

1990 
5th US Amateur Time Trial Championship
11th World Amatur Championship


----------



## Lifelover (Jul 8, 2004)

*I like them both*



patchito said:


> Yes, I know, it's inevitable. We'll always have those that resent the guy at the top. But what is it that we admire in our sports heroes? As with Cub or Red Sox fans, sometimes people identify with futility and are loyal to their adopted teams in spite of failure. "The Cubbies might be a bad team, but they're MY team."
> 
> I think some people identify athletes who exhibit style or panache irrespective of accomplishment. Other's might admire those athletes who perform at the highest level and do it quietly....the John Stockton's of the world.
> 
> What kind of perplexes me is the legion of Jan fans. Yeah, he's a talented rider, and if you had to pick a cycling hero other than Lance, there haven't been to many that have stuck around in recent years ceppin for Jan, but still, is he really worthy of admiration? Between ploughing through bike racks in a drunken stupor, partying it up on X, coming to the Tour underprepared and overeweight, and just downright sucking at the critical moments, it seems the guy's the perfect example of squandered ability. Yet, still he's got rabid fan base....why?


I'm a Lance fan because he is an American, the best rider in the last couple of decades and it is just a great story. 

I'm a Jan fan because I like the under dog and people seem to forget that he is the second best rider in the last couple of decades.

As with any athlete that competes at that level their behavior outside of the sport is questionable. With Lance it is his behavior as a husband and a father that I would judge as lacking while with Jan it is more his day to day decision making.

Bottom line is that they are both the best or damn near the best at what they do. That is admirable. 

As far as haters go. There are some people that will find a reason to hate no matter what. I hate them!


----------



## 97 Teran (Feb 17, 2004)

*Interesting, I had the opposite idea*



nwilkes said:


> Then because of LA, your Sunday ride is inundated by hairy legged yahoos in US Postal kits who have no control over their brand new Trek Madones. And to boot the price of various gear goes sky high - component shortage my a$$.


That component and other item prices were being driven up by the weight weenies for whom manufacturers create new, relatively unnecessary products- and not due to lack of availability, but due to progressive pricing policies and simply charging what the market will bear. I need neither 10 speeds (I ride 9, but believe I'd be quite happy with 8), a carbon bedpan, fragmentation-proof x-ray Oakleys, nor a 4-dimensional stretch bikini-wax giving chamois pad. But people buy them... compulsively. 

That said, you're probably right as well- I noticed last year that USPS team kit was a good bit more expensive than any other. Is it really necessary to charge over/nearly $100 for a lame looking jersey? Apparently.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

nwilkes said:


> The anti-lance fan reaction is a big part. Even deeper and more fundamental is that cycling fans can be really elitist. No doubt this has appealed to me. The sport is difficult, misunderstood by most and at the very fringe of what many people will pay attention to. Then because of LA, your Sunday ride is inundated by hairy legged yahoos in US Postal kits who have no control over their brand new Trek Madones. And to boot the price of various gear goes sky high - component shortage my a$$.
> 
> Jan Ullrich offers at once both an antagonism towards these new fans as well as something erudite and foriegn (two traits close to cyclists it seems). I like Ullrich too and without him the TDF would be legitimately boring.
> As for me I could care less if LA rides more or less than the TDF. I just enjoy being able to see bike races on the TV; the more the better. I won't slight Van Petegem for only contesting races before May or Heras for lighting up the Vuelta and sucking wind every other month of the year. That being said my favorite riders are the ones who can never be counted out of an attack regardless of the conditions - like my boy Flecha. Still I will enjoy watching all of them ride. IMHO.
> ...



I like the points you made about fad riders with more money than desire. Their fat wallets the pervasive delusion that money will buy cycling happiness and performance contribute to ridiculously high priced components, and premature demise of perfectly adequate equipment- (8-9speed, threaded headsets, steel frames, 32 spoke wheels, practical saddles, sub-$50 handlebars, sub-$150 shoes, sub-$100 helmets, sub-$40 tires, etc. 
But then again, they did contribute to the development of triple chainrings. 
I'm trying to avoid the polarizing mentality dictating that if you like one guy, you must hate the competition. If you like steel, you must hate cf. If you ride mtb, roadies must be p*ssys. 
The part I like about cycling is that it's not easy. Over the long term, it weeds out those who are unwilling to deal with mother nature, and their own weakness. And because there's little public or social glory or recognition, it weeds out those searching for such things. It keeps you honest.


----------



## covenant (May 21, 2002)

Lifelover said:


> With Lance it is his behavior as a husband and a father that I would judge as lacking....


Expound on that if you would. I heard his divorce was amicable and he wants to quit racing so he can spend more time with his kids. Or do you side with Paul deParrie on this? newswithviews.com/deParrie/paul17.htm


----------



## nwilkes (Jun 21, 2004)

Jesse D Smith said:


> But then again, they did contribute to the development of triple chainrings.


not the T-word. Now your really going to bring out the elitists.


----------



## KenB (Jul 28, 2004)

nwilkes said:


> The anti-lance fan reaction is a big part. Even deeper and more fundamental is that cycling fans can be really elitist. No doubt this has appealed to me. The sport is difficult, misunderstood by most and at the very fringe of what many people will pay attention to. Then because of LA, your Sunday ride is inundated by hairy legged yahoos in US Postal kits who have no control over their brand new Trek Madones.


 In other words: Waaaaaaaa! It's _MY _sport and I don't want all you hairy apes diluting it! 

Ugh.


----------



## MaRider (Mar 21, 2002)

Frank Tuesday said:


> Why Anti-Lance???
> 
> There is the feeble argument that the Tour is the best because the best riders do the tour. How do they get to be the best? By doing well in the tour. It is a completly circular argument which holds absolutely no validity. Has Lance gone to the Giro and tried to win? The Veulta? The last time a rider made a serious attempt at both was pantani in 1998, and he won the Tour by a greater margin against the "better riders".
> 
> Give me a racer over a TdF specialist anyday. I'll take Vino, DiLuca, Zabel or a hundred other riders who may not win the tour, but will fight for victories from spring to fall.


How many Vueltas or Giros did Vino ride? DiLuca is not even riding the tour now, or does he? Neither does Zabel, but that's a different story. He is a sprinter anyways. Should we blame him for not contesting mountain stages?

Seems like specialization is the key word in contemporary cycling. Some people are great at climbing, some at TT, some at long breakaways, some at sprints, some at one-day classics, some at long tours. Long Tours are considered a pinnacle of racing (perhaps unfairly so, but nevertheless true), for their combination of skills and dedication neccessary to win a tour, and a variety of riders that can participate and win in one way or another (a jersey, a stage win, etc.). Tactically Tours are much more interesting to watch than most one-day races. 

You cannot seriously argue that all Tours are created equal. TdF is by far brings out the best talent and has the most prestige in winning an overall title, placing in top 5 or even 10, winning a stage... TdF is the truly internationally contested affair, while Vuelta and Giro are primarily national tours - how many non-italians won Giro or non-spaniards won Vuelta in the past 5 years or so?

So I think your critisism is somewhat unfounded. If I were the rider of Armstrong's caliber and I was faced with a chance of winning the Tour or winning Vuelta/Giro, I would pick the Tour without even thinking. I would pick Tour win over winning both Vuelta and Giro, and any three wins at any spring classics. 

Now, why wouldn't he go for all three or at least two out of three grand tours? The answer is not that Armstrong is afraid to lose or is lazy, but that it is probably not very realistic and would seriously jeopardize his chances of preparing well for the Tour. How many riders in the past 7 year "Armstrong" era got on a podium in two grand tours in the same year? Beloki is the only one with third in 2002 Vuelta and second in 2002 Tour...
Not sure how many seriously contended for top 10 in both, but not many...

So if you don't like Lance for not contending other grand tours, then you should extend the same courtesy to other riders as well.

Giro:
2004 Damiano Cunego (Ita) Serguei Gonchar (Ukr) Gilberto Simoni (Ita)
2003 Gilberto Simoni (Ita) Stefano Garzelli (Ita) Yaroslav Popovych (Ukr)
2002 Paolo Savoldelli (Ita) Tyler Hamilton (USA) Pietro Caucchioli (Ita)
2001 Gilberto Simoni (Ita) Abraham Olano (Spa) Unai Osa (Spa)
2000 Stefano Garzelli (Ita) Francesco Casagrande (Ita) Gilberto Simoni (Ita)
1999 Ivan Gotti (Ita) Paolo Savoldelli (Ita) Gilberto Simoni (Ita)

Vuelta:
2004 1 Roberto Heras (Spa) Santiago Perez (Spa) Francisco Mancebo (Spa) 
2003 Roberto Heras (Spa) Isidro Nozal (Spa) Alejandro Valverde (Spa) 
2002 Aitor Gonzalez (Spa) Roberto Heras (Spa) Joseba Beloki (Spa) 
2001 Angel Casero (Spa) Oscar Sevilla (Spa) Levi Leipheimer (USA)
2000 Roberto Heras (Spa) Angel Casero (Spa) Pavel Tonkov (Rus)
1999 Jan Ullrich (Ger) Igor Glez. Galdeano (Spa) Roberto Heras (Spa)


Tour:
2004 1 Lance Armstrong (USA) 
2 Andreas Klöden (Ger) 
3 Ivan Basso (Ita) 

2003 1 Lance Armstrong (USA) 
2 Jan Ullrich (Ger) 
3 Alexandre Vinokourov (Kaz) 

2002 1 Lance Armstrong (USA) 
2 Joseba Beloki (Spa) 
3 Raimondas Rumsas (Ltu) 

2001 1 Lance Armstrong (USA) 
2 Jan Ullrich (Ger) 
3 Joseba Beloki (Spa) 

2000 1 Lance Armstrong (USA) 
2 Jan Ullrich (Ger) 
3 Joseba Beloki (Spa) 

1999 1 Lance Armstrong (USA) 
2 Alex Zulle (Swi) 
3 Fernando Escartin (Spa)


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

nwilkes said:


> not the T-word. Now your really going to bring out the elitists.


Ironically, the T-word is a product of elitism. New cyclists who had to have the same bike as the pros, had to have the same 53t big ring and the same 11t small cog. They soon found they were walking their 53t up hills or worse yet, turning around before the hill started. Again, cycling forces you to be honest. If you can't push the big gears, be grateful there are gears available that let you continue cycling no matter the speed. If a stronger rider belittles you, be all the more eager to have him prove it by riding away from you at break-neck speed.


----------



## Lifelover (Jul 8, 2004)

*I would tend to agree with Paul...*



covenant said:


> Expound on that if you would. I heard his divorce was amicable and he wants to quit racing so he can spend more time with his kids. Or do you side with Paul deParrie on this? newswithviews.com/deParrie/paul17.htm


...even though he sounds French.

I in no way feel as strongly about the subject as Parrie but he does pretty much some up my point.

I think the same can be said for almost anyone who is at the absolute top of their profession. You just can't do both.

Then again maybe this is just how I justify being a slacker


----------



## nwilkes (Jun 21, 2004)

Jesse D Smith said:


> Ironically, the T-word is a product of elitism. New cyclists who had to have the same bike as the pros, had to have the same 53t big ring and the same 11t small cog. They soon found they were walking their 53t up hills or worse yet, turning around before the hill started. Again, cycling forces you to be honest. If you can't push the big gears, be grateful there are gears available that let you continue cycling no matter the speed. If a stronger rider belittles you, be all the more eager to have him prove it by riding away from you at break-neck speed.


thats compensation, not elitism.


----------



## esbike (Jul 4, 2005)

*are you crazy?*

I've been road biking for 20+ years and have no idea what you are talking about in regards to "freds" driving up the cost of bikes/components. I think it is the exact opposite. If you didn' t live through the era when road bike were in a small corner in most bike shops while mountain bikes were everywhere then maybe I can understand. Do you think a high tech carbon bike with great components would be affordable if they were not selling gobs of them? I bought a trek aluminum/carbon bike in 1996 for about $1500. That same money now in similar dollar terms (allowing for inflation) will buy you so much better bike, way lighter, much better ride, far superior components. You young guys are clueless if you don't think the popularity of road bikes, fueled in part by Lance in the media, has improved both the technology and value of equipment available!


----------



## RodeRash (May 18, 2005)

How about this? 

I want to see Lance win a 7th Tour because it's never been done. I want to see him raise $$$ for cancer research because I think it's a good cause. But I don't think I'd want to meet him nor would I think about inviting him to my party. I respect him, even admire him, but I don't think I'd like to pal around with him. 

Ullrich is more classically the iconoclast, temperamental cyclist. As noted elsewhere in these forums he's like a full-race Ferrari . . . when it's running it's impressive. But it's "in the shop being tuned" a great deal. 

Fignon was a great rider and a complete jerk. I think maybe it goes with the territory. Cycling attracts an elite minority. We shouldn't expect them to all be "good ol' boys."


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

overtraining?




Jesse D Smith said:


> For myself, I trained many more hours than any other member of my team. My coach told me so. I weighed 130 lbs, 80% of that was in the legs, yet I saw other riders start training after me, train less than me, and still progress to a level I never could. I had to face my limitations. I never won a race. My best finish was a top ten in a cat V race. But since I believe my motivations were fairly honorable, for the enjoyment and personal challenge, I'm still riding knowing I'll never attain even the lowest level of glory. I've seen many talented riders lose interest. They attained some level of success with minimum effort and were spared constant failure. Yet they lost interest. I can't blame them if in their heart, cycling just didn't raise their spirits.


----------



## Frank Tuesday (Jun 1, 2002)

MaRider said:


> So if you don't like Lance for not contending other grand tours, then you should extend the same courtesy to other riders as well.


The question was about Lance specifically, and my reply had nothing to do with the three Grand Tours specifically. It has to do with people who race all (or most of the) year trying to win. I couldn't give a piss if a rider decided to forego all three grand tours if they are out there racing one day and short stage races instead. I don't even care if they win or not, as long as they are out there trying to win, which is something that Lance does little of if it isn't July.


----------



## Bianchigirl (Sep 17, 2004)

best 2 riders of the last couple of decades? I really feel that Indurain and Pantani would have a lot to say about that...


----------



## Bianchigirl (Sep 17, 2004)

Armstrong is a winner - not a cyclist. He would be a winner whatever his sport but it never seems like the romance/history/tradition of the sport actually means anything to him. Ullrich, on the other hand, seems like a bloke who enjoys riding a bike but doesn't take it all that seriously - one of the joys of watching him win in 1997 was the real joy he took in riding and the fact that winning genuinely didn't seem to be the be all and end all for him - just the sheer enjoyment of riding a bike.

Armstrong is efficient, destructive, a winner - that is impressive in its way. But there's preciosu little joy or pleasure in the way he approaches his one race, the TdF. Perhaps if he raced more, or didn't treat every race as an exercise to psyche out his opponents, or just smiled more, looked like what he was doing was - though painful - something that brings him more than millions...


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

I don't think he'd be a winner in sumo wrestling.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

*These are people...*



patchito said:


> Yes, I know, it's inevitable. We'll always have those that resent the guy at the top. But what is it that we admire in our sports heroes? As with Cub or Red Sox fans, sometimes people identify with futility and are loyal to their adopted teams in spite of failure. "The Cubbies might be a bad team, but they're MY team."
> 
> I think some people identify athletes who exhibit style or panache irrespective of accomplishment. Other's might admire those athletes who perform at the highest level and do it quietly....the John Stockton's of the world.
> 
> What kind of perplexes me is the legion of Jan fans. Yeah, he's a talented rider, and if you had to pick a cycling hero other than Lance, there haven't been to many that have stuck around in recent years ceppin for Jan, but still, is he really worthy of admiration? Between ploughing through bike racks in a drunken stupor, partying it up on X, coming to the Tour underprepared and overeweight, and just downright sucking at the critical moments, it seems the guy's the perfect example of squandered ability. Yet, still he's got rabid fan base....why?


who need a hobby. Maybe they should be spending more time on riding their bikes.


----------



## patchito (Jun 30, 2005)

Bianchigirl said:


> Armstrong is a winner - not a cyclist. He would be a winner whatever his sport but it never seems like the romance/history/tradition of the sport actually means anything to him. Ullrich, on the other hand, seems like a bloke who enjoys riding a bike but doesn't take it all that seriously - one of the joys of watching him win in 1997 was the real joy he took in riding and the fact that winning genuinely didn't seem to be the be all and end all for him - just the sheer enjoyment of riding a bike.
> 
> Armstrong is efficient, destructive, a winner - that is impressive in its way. But there's preciosu little joy or pleasure in the way he approaches his one race, the TdF. Perhaps if he raced more, or didn't treat every race as an exercise to psyche out his opponents, or just smiled more, looked like what he was doing was - though painful - something that brings him more than millions...


You could have distilled your response down to three words - "Image is everything"


----------



## Spoke Wrench (Aug 20, 2001)

I don't think that it's very hard to understand. In my daily travels I meet lots of people who believe that everything that any American does is automatically superior just because we are Americans. There is a substantial sized faction of those people in the United States - possibly even enough to swing an election.

I assume that other countries have their own such chauvenists too. Honestly, people from the different areas supporting their favorite sons and waveing Basque flags is one of the things that I find attractive about the tour.


----------



## patchito (Jun 30, 2005)

Spoke Wrench said:


> I don't think that it's very hard to understand. In my daily travels I meet lots of people who believe that everything that any American does is automatically superior just because we are Americans. There is a substantial sized faction of those people in the United States - possibly even enough to swing an election.
> 
> I assume that other countries have their own such chauvenists too. Honestly, people from the different areas supporting their favorite sons and waveing Basque flags is one of the things that I find attractive about the tour.



You mean like this?



BTW -


> I don't think that it's very hard to understand. In my daily travels I meet lots of people who believe that everything that any American does is automatically [subject to derision] just because we are Americans. There is a substantial sized faction of those people in the United States - possibly even enough to [make that leftard Micheal Moore a household name].


In other words, 

Americans who support Lance b/c he's a fellow countryman = bad
Basques who wave flags, spit on Lance and plant bombs = good


----------



## KenB (Jul 28, 2004)

Bianchigirl said:


> But there's preciosu little joy or pleasure in the way he approaches his one race, the TdF. Perhaps if he raced more, or didn't treat every race as an exercise to psyche out his opponents, or just smiled more, looked like what he was doing was - though painful - something that brings him more than millions...


 I think he takes great pleasure from demolishing and demoralizing his opponents. That's what he's supposed to do.


----------



## MaRider (Mar 21, 2002)

Frank Tuesday said:


> The question was about Lance specifically, and my reply had nothing to do with the three Grand Tours specifically. It has to do with people who race all (or most of the) year trying to win. I couldn't give a piss if a rider decided to forego all three grand tours if they are out there racing one day and short stage races instead. I don't even care if they win or not, as long as they are out there trying to win, which is something that Lance does little of if it isn't July.


Sometimes you need to pick your battles. Realizing this is part of being a pro. Most professional cyclists know better than to become an "also-ran" who race year around. Instead, most of them concentrate on one tour, or one or two key one-day races. Very few race a lot, and those who do, generally lose. 

Singling out Lance for focusing specifically on the Tour, while completely ignoring ALL of his rivals who do EXACTLY the same implies that the poster(s) single out Lance for other reasons. Or, perhaps they despise all of the professional bikers?


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

patchito said:


> You mean like this?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It will be interesting to see how Germany greets Lance.


----------



## dawgcatching (Apr 26, 2004)

For me personally, it seems that Ullrich acts like a man and takes responsibility for poor performances, while in Lance's case, it is always somebody else's fault-he is always blaming someone or something for his shortcomings. Ullrich just seems more honorable, never making excuses.

Case in point: in 2003, Lance struggled a bit up Alpe d'Huez. We all heard later how he wasn't feeling well, how his brake was dragging the whole day-just one excuse after another (especially after the bad time trial a few days later). Yet Ullirch lost over 2 minutes on that day as well-had food poisoining and was sick, yet this fact was hardly mentioned, and definitely not used as an excuse for Jan. We didn't hear Jan making excuses to everyone and everyone who would listen-he just didn't get the job done-not much need to dwell on it or make excuses. Same thing happened the other day during stage 1: Ullrich went through a car window the day before! He lost blood, and there was no way he wasn't brusied up after that: it is impossible to compete at 100% when your body is trying to deal with recovery from something like that. Yet, when asked directly if this was a cause of his poor performance, he basically said "I don't want to blame the crash-I just had a very poor performance, and am quite humiliated". 

If Lance had struggled, would we have heard a simple "I didn't get the job done" statement from him? Not likely-much more likely would have a been a laundry-list of excuses, blaming his tech, his bike, the French fans who don't like him, his astrologist, ect.


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

patchito said:


> You mean like this?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What steps of logic did you follow after flags and spit and before arriving at planting bombs? Perhaps something comparable to the below? 

Americans who support Lance, torture prisoners, and are fat = bad


----------



## patchito (Jun 30, 2005)

divve said:


> What steps of logic did you follow after flags and spit and before arriving at planting bombs? Perhaps something comparable to the below?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Spoke Wrench (Aug 20, 2001)

patchito said:


> You mean like this?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's a little bit hard to tell from your still photo but you may have lost your objectivity. There is clearly one guy flipping Lance the finger. It looks to me like several other people are cheering and a lot of people look pretty indifferent. 

It isn't just because Lance is American either. Eddy Mercx had a spectator punch him out on the Alpe Du Huez.

Check out the outfield bleachers at a major league baseball game. Better yet, ask any major league outfielder if he's ever had beer poured on him. People in all countries like to cheer for their sports heros and sometimes get carried away with jeering opponents. 

I was very careful, by the way, not to say that I thought Americans were any better or any worse in that regard than people from other countries. Truthfully, I think that as national groups we all act pretty much the same.


----------



## patchito (Jun 30, 2005)

Spoke Wrench said:


> It's a little bit hard to tell from your still photo but you may have lost your objectivity. There is clearly one guy flipping Lance the finger. It looks to me like several other people are cheering and a lot of people look pretty indifferent.
> 
> It isn't just because Lance is American either. Eddy Mercx had a spectator punch him out on the Alpe Du Huez.
> 
> ...


Nope. English soccer fans are worse.

Good response, though.


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

Did you perhaps mean a specific hardcore group of criminals who wish to identify themselves as soccer fans?

BTW, if you're anything less than 6ft you're still fat at 150.


----------



## MaRider (Mar 21, 2002)

dawgcatching said:


> For me personally, it seems that Ullrich acts like a man and takes responsibility for poor performances, while in Lance's case, it is always somebody else's fault-he is always blaming someone or something for his shortcomings. Ullrich just seems more honorable, never making excuses.
> 
> Case in point: in 2003, Lance struggled a bit up Alpe d'Huez. We all heard later how he wasn't feeling well, how his brake was dragging the whole day-just one excuse after another (especially after the bad time trial a few days later). Yet Ullirch lost over 2 minutes on that day as well-had food poisoining and was sick, yet this fact was hardly mentioned, and definitely not used as an excuse for Jan. We didn't hear Jan making excuses to everyone and everyone who would listen-he just didn't get the job done-not much need to dwell on it or make excuses. Same thing happened the other day during stage 1: Ullrich went through a car window the day before! He lost blood, and there was no way he wasn't brusied up after that: it is impossible to compete at 100% when your body is trying to deal with recovery from something like that. Yet, when asked directly if this was a cause of his poor performance, he basically said "I don't want to blame the crash-I just had a very poor performance, and am quite humiliated".
> 
> If Lance had struggled, would we have heard a simple "I didn't get the job done" statement from him? Not likely-much more likely would have a been a laundry-list of excuses, blaming his tech, his bike, the French fans who don't like him, his astrologist, ect.


You can have a bad day every couple of years or so, and if an any other day you have been nearly perfect, you get a right to dismiss it as a fluke, an illness, or just a bad "bonk" day. Especially if in grand scheme of things you have the record to back it up. Like winning the tour a record 6 times despite the "bad" days.

On the other hand, if despite showing enormous promise at very early age and being nicknamed "The Most Talented Rider", year after year you show up to the biggest race of your life unprepared and overweight, and your results suffer because of personal indulgement during the winter, while the other guy(s) was/were training, I don't think you deserve much of my sympathy. We all tend to associate with overweight "Michelin Man" Jan as he is nicknamed by HIS OWN team! But the only reason some of us don't like Lance is perhaps because we don't like someone who is better than us, who is more dedicated to the sport than us, who has the guts to train through the winter instead of eating donuts.

If I was an american citizen I would NOT be ashamed of being a Lance fan!

I am riding TREK and think that any american who rides Bianci or Cervello is much more of a poser than any guy riding in full US Postal Kit. 

Bottom line - if Ullrich was "acting like a man" and "taking responsibility for his bad performances" like you say, perhaps he would traing through the winter and recon the TdF course and train specifically with the TdF in his mind in 1998 when Pantani won.
Or perhaps he could do it in 1999.
Or perhaps he could do it in 2000.
Or perhaps he could do it in 2001.
Or perhaps he could do it in 2002.
Or perhaps he could do it in 2003.
Or perhaps he could do it in 2004.
Or perhaps he could do it in 2005, instead of getting passed by a 1-minute man at his best discipline, ITT.

He had plenty of opportunity to "act like a man", instead he was partying with X-stacy, driving while drunk (and destroying bikes in the process), and becoming fat while using old excuses to explain his abysmall record. 

Idolizing Ian as oppposed to being a Lance fan says more about you than about those two riders. Lance got a lot of flak for getting divorced. I am a divorced man after being married for 9 years, as are 50% of married man. Perhaps it speaks to my bad character. But I never heard anyone critisize Ian for separating with his equally long-term girlfriend with which he had a baby. I don't blame him either, as I know personal relationships are difficult for people like Ian or Lance. But there's a lot of double standard out there.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

*not possible*



bas said:


> overtraining?


At least that's what my meth dealer told me.


----------



## patchito (Jun 30, 2005)

divve said:


> Did you perhaps mean a specific hardcore group of criminals who wish to identify themselves as soccer fans?
> 
> BTW, if you're anything less than 6ft you're still fat at 150.



No. I meant English soccer fans.


my BMI is in the 17th percentile, which means that 83% of all people at my height weigh more than I. If that's fat to you, then you must think Kate Moss and Twiggy are totally hot, and are a devotee of the Karen Carpenter weight loss plan.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

esbike said:


> I've been road biking for 20+ years and have no idea what you are talking about in regards to "freds" driving up the cost of bikes/components. I think it is the exact opposite. If you didn' t live through the era when road bike were in a small corner in most bike shops while mountain bikes were everywhere then maybe I can understand. Do you think a high tech carbon bike with great components would be affordable if they were not selling gobs of them? I bought a trek aluminum/carbon bike in 1996 for about $1500. That same money now in similar dollar terms (allowing for inflation) will buy you so much better bike, way lighter, much better ride, far superior components. You young guys are clueless if you don't think the popularity of road bikes, fueled in part by Lance in the media, has improved both the technology and value of equipment available!


There was an even earlier era before mountain bikes had their day in the sun. 
I'll believe todays bikes have a better ride when someone shows me the data. Better components? How much longer will a Dura-Ace 10-sp integrated shifter last than a Dura-Ace 8-sp downtube shifter? How long does a 10sp chain last compared to an 8-speed chain? How many times can you drop a carbon bike and ride away vs. an older steel bike? How much superior is a carbon fork when it's sheered in half? How expensive is it to repair a funky botique wheel vs a 32h traditional wheel? How much easier or affordable is it to service an integrated headset vs. a threaded headset? I agree the boom has improved the value of equipment. Older Time Equipe pedals are selling for very high prices on EBAY because their no longer available for Time. A riders tried and true comfortable NOS quality '80's saddle is a wise investment considering what's being offered today and the fact that it's been pushed out of the market by the fred's demand for a carbon speculum. 

In 2001, Colorado Cyclist sold Carnac Legend shoes. In the product description, they described them as "Carnac's most popular model." In 2002, they discontinued them, making room for the triple and quadrouple strap fad, which everybody assumed would be superior, which in turn was discontinued in favor of the buckle and strap era. Rather than be upfront greedy, and charge more for the same proven thing, it's more palatable to drop current models and push the next greatest thing +$100. OK, maybe I'm bitter, but when a shoe fits like Cinderella's slipper, and they get taken away, you take it personally. 

I'm not saying all older is better. Newer clinchers are much easier to deal with than tubulars. Newer clipless pedals with float save more knees than clips and straps. Dual pivot brakes with shorter reach and better pads are superior and safer to older brakes. Synthetic chamois is far superior to petrified deer skin.


----------



## Miles E (Jul 31, 2003)

MaRider said:


> We all tend to associate with overweight "Michelin Man" Jan


Right. I think this is the answer to Patchito's original question. Most people are their own worst enemy when it comes to living up to their potential. Jan just happens to have a lot more potential than the rest of us, but still blows it more often than not. I think most of us can relate to that better than being the best at what we do for the last seven years. And then of course there are the Lance-haters who automatically attach themselves to his archnemesis/antithesis. 

I think the important question raised here is who is the John Stockton of cycling today? My vote would be for Eric Zabel. Pretty low key, professional persona and the record to back up (other people's) claims that he is one of the best the sport has seen in his specialty. Not the flashiest guy out there though, so easy to get lost in the shuffle.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

patchito said:


> Yes, I know, it's inevitable. We'll always have those that resent the guy at the top. But what is it that we admire in our sports heroes? As with Cub or Red Sox fans, sometimes people identify with futility and are loyal to their adopted teams in spite of failure. "The Cubbies might be a bad team, but they're MY team."
> 
> I think some people identify athletes who exhibit style or panache irrespective of accomplishment. Other's might admire those athletes who perform at the highest level and do it quietly....the John Stockton's of the world.
> 
> What kind of perplexes me is the legion of Jan fans. Yeah, he's a talented rider, and if you had to pick a cycling hero other than Lance, there haven't been to many that have stuck around in recent years ceppin for Jan, but still, is he really worthy of admiration? Between ploughing through bike racks in a drunken stupor, partying it up on X, coming to the Tour underprepared and overeweight, and just downright sucking at the critical moments, it seems the guy's the perfect example of squandered ability. Yet, still he's got rabid fan base....why?



Looking at it from their side, it's not hard to find Lance personally dislikeable. He has Bush's same "either with me or against me" attitude. If you leave USPS or Disco, you are now the enemy, both on and off the bike. He tolerates Jan because Jan bows to him and has never tries to impose any will on him. 
If you are part of USPS or Disco, Lance comes first, and you should enjoy the privlege of being along for the ride. He'll take care of you. Now that's understandable if he also had the "if you don't like it, feel free to leave" attitude. But he doesn't allow riders to feel free to leave. He can't respect a rider's own needs for personal satisfaction. I doubt anybody who's worked for him, then left to do their own thing has every retained a friendship with him. He has to spin it into a Judas scenerio. This probably comes from being abandoned by his pops. 

It would be nice to admire and cheer for a winner who could find motivation in other areas than anomosity. Again, we're back to the fact that if no t for these unsavory traits, he wouldn't win 7.


----------



## ScottS (Jul 27, 2004)

MaRider said:


> Sometimes you need to pick your battles. Realizing this is part of being a pro. Most professional cyclists know better than to become an "also-ran" who race year around. Instead, most of them concentrate on one tour, or one or two key one-day races. Very few race a lot, and those who do, generally lose.
> 
> Singling out Lance for focusing specifically on the Tour, while completely ignoring ALL of his rivals who do EXACTLY the same implies that the poster(s) single out Lance for other reasons. Or, perhaps they despise all of the professional bikers?


Finally, someone speaks with common sense. With the increased focus on timing training for peak fitness, anyone who ignores this is disadvantaging themselves before the race even begins. The days when one rider could dominate for an entire season seem to be over. At this level, the sport has evolved beyond that due to changes in medicine, science and technology. The clock can't be turned back.


----------



## MaRider (Mar 21, 2002)

Miles E said:


> Right. I think this is the answer to Patchito's original question. Most people are their own worst enemy when it comes to living up to their potential. Jan just happens to have a lot more potential than the rest of us, but still blows it more often than not. I think most of us can relate to that better than being the best at what we do for the last seven years. And then of course there are the Lance-haters who automatically attach themselves to his archnemesis/antithesis.
> 
> I think the important question raised here is who is the John Stockton of cycling today? My vote would be for Eric Zabel. Pretty low key, professional persona and the record to back up (other people's) claims that he is one of the best the sport has seen in his specialty. Not the flashiest guy out there though, so easy to get lost in the shuffle.


My vote goes for someone like Eki who despite his olympic medals would quietly and selflessly ride in support of other riders like LA. Same goes for Hincapie.

But then again, this is part of their jobs...


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

patchito said:


> No. I meant English soccer fans.
> 
> 
> my BMI is in the 17th percentile, which means that 83% of all people at my height weigh more than I. If that's fat to you, then you must think Kate Moss and Twiggy are totally hot, and are a devotee of the Karen Carpenter weight loss plan.


Merely pointing out, in simple terms, how your posts repeatedly attempt to stigmatize large population groups and even nations through the actions of the few. I appear to have hit some sort of nerve with the weight thing though....


----------



## crashjames (Jan 14, 2003)

*Um, not quite*



lamazion said:


> Unfortunately LeMond developed this model, and Indurian followed the model to 5 tour victories. The contenders of the modern tour are following this model. Gone are the days when a rider will be competitive through the entire season


Indurain managed to win both the Giro and Vuelta during his run of 5 tours. As well as other races during the year. Hardly what could be considered a one trick pony.


----------



## firebrick (Jun 17, 2005)

from a newbies point of view, you guys sure argue about some stupid stuff, i think lance is cool so blah!


----------



## SJBiker (Jan 22, 2004)

*You're german I believe*



firebrick said:


> from a newbies point of view, you guys sure argue about some stupid stuff, i think lance is cool so blah!


No way you could be living in the USA. i bet you're German. 


I'm being highly sarcastic. BTW, this forum is meant for just such discussions, 'stupid' or not.


----------



## firebrick (Jun 17, 2005)

born and bred iowan , maybe thats the reason for my insanity


----------



## DeoreDX (Jan 9, 2003)

*Lance Haters and Jan Fans (lumped in together)*

I've read this thread with interest - it seems that some people are assuming that if you are a 'Jan-Fan', you must be a 'Lance Hater'. This sounds a little like trolling. That aside, the reasons that people don't want to see Lance win are many:

He's won 6 times - this makes any sport boring - Schumacher in F1, that Monkey-guy in tennis a few years ago (forget his name) and the Celtic-Rangers two-horse race in football. We need variation.

He shows no passion/grit/emotion/hardship at all. Many people like to see someone struggle to achieve, not do it without any apparent investment.

He is a one-trick pony. Yeah, yeah, I've seen the Palmares further up the thread - but come on - the Dauphine, the Ride for the Roses (his own charity pootle) and other races hardly put in the same league as Merckx who raced EVERYTHING there was to race. I'm not saying he isn't good, but it is an insult to compare him and his riding to a man who entered a full season. Say he is the best TDF rider ever if you must, but don't suggest he is the best rider ever - he's not even in the top 10.

He comes across as arrogant - I know Americans seem to think that the French are arrogant, but the rest of world thinks America holds that crown (rightly or wrongly - not my opinion) and therefore he is disliked purely because of which passport he holds.

He has popularised a sport that some people love for it's niche status. There is a pleasure in seeing another lone rider and the knowing nod you exchange - some people don't want hordes of part-timers making us all seem common and ordinary.

Like I said, these are some of the reasons - some I share, others I don't.

Can't fault him for coming back from cancer though!


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

DeoreDX said:


> I've read this thread with interest - it seems that some people are assuming that if you are a 'Jan-Fan', you must be a 'Lance Hater'. This sounds a little like trolling. That aside, the reasons that people don't want to see Lance win are many:
> 
> He's won 6 times - this makes any sport boring - Schumacher in F1, that Monkey-guy in tennis a few years ago (forget his name) and the Celtic-Rangers two-horse race in football. We need variation.


True but I don't agree with boring part... To each their own.



DeoreDX said:


> He shows no passion/grit/emotion/hardship at all. Many people like to see someone struggle to achieve, not do it without any apparent investment.


True many people appreciate the struggle to achieve. If you can't see or sense his passion/grit/emotion/hardship at all that does not mean he doesn't or hasn't. It means you may lack vision and sense.



DeoreDX said:


> He is a one-trick pony. Yeah, yeah, I've seen the Palmares further up the thread - but come on - the Dauphine, the Ride for the Roses (his own charity pootle) and other races hardly put in the same league as Merckx who raced EVERYTHING there was to race. I'm not saying he isn't good, but it is an insult to compare him and his riding to a man who entered a full season. Say he is the best TDF rider ever if you must, but don't suggest he is the best rider ever - he's not even in the top 10.


Generally true but not 100%.



DeoreDX said:


> He comes across as arrogant - I know Americans seem to think that the French are arrogant, but the rest of world thinks America holds that crown (rightly or wrongly - not my opinion) and therefore he is disliked purely because of which passport he holds.


What are you saying? He comes across as arrogant and therefore he is disliked purely because of which passport he holds. That statement makes no sense. 



DeoreDX said:


> He has popularised a sport that some people love for it's niche status. There is a pleasure in seeing another lone rider and the knowing nod you exchange - some people don't want hordes of part-timers making us all seem common and ordinary.


Perhaps for some. I'm not sure that's why I love it but I generally ride alone.



DeoreDX said:


> Like I said, these are some of the reasons - some I share, others I don't.
> 
> Can't fault him for coming back from cancer though!


Only a nutter would.

I need to go ride now.


----------



## dawgcatching (Apr 26, 2004)

MaRider said:


> Idolizing Ian as oppposed to being a Lance fan says more about you than about those two riders. .


And what exactly does this say about "me"? I was with an aquaintance when he met Lance at a race in 1998 (post cancer, shortly before his Vuelta performance). The guy I was with went up to him and simply said "may I shake your hand? I am a big admirer". Lance looked at him like he was some sort of pest, said "OK", then turned around and quickly found somebody else to talk to, probably saying to himself "stupid, annoying fan". I thought he was a jerk then, so maybe my opinion is a little biased. I tend to root for sports figures that are charismatic and love their fans, such as Steve Prefontaine and Bode Miller. Lance is definitely more Tiger Woods than Arnold Palmer, cold and efficient. Not the type of athlete I feel like rooting for. Probably the same reason many ManU fans are jumping ship after the Glazer takeover-they don't want a part of a soulless corporate organization. 

Also,I have seen many more photos of Jan signing autographs for fans (and smiling while doing it) than Lance. Jan seems to love the sport and love the atmosphere, Lance tries to insulate himself from those "evils". 

So, I like Jan more than Lance. I wouldn't call that idolization, just the fact that Jan is easy to root for, Lance is a jerk and obviously doesn't need my support!


----------



## svend (Jul 18, 2003)

MaRider said:


> I am riding TREK and think that any american who rides Bianci or Cervello is much more of a poser than any guy riding in full US Postal Kit.


Wrong. I bought my (steel) Cervelo prior to their becoming the CSC ride, and even if I hadn't it still would not mean jack squat. Riding around in a full team kit, of which you are not a member is just plain silly, especially as most who do it are mediocre riders at best.

Only posers ride CF.


----------



## MikeMo (Jul 3, 2005)

divve said:


> BTW, if you're anything less than 6ft you're still fat at 150.


before addressing the original topic, the statement above is rediculous, Im 5'11 and 170 pounds and my body fat percentage prior to my last track season (before I was even close to my peak) I had a body fat % of 4.9 So I wholeheartedly disagree with that statment

I happen to like both riders because Lance is just a winner and like it or not he's made cycling much much bigger in the US and he may be a jerk or whatever but without him I doubt we have much more then newspaper results and maybe like 2 hours a week of coverage. I like Jan because he seems to do well despite having almost no team to support him, they've got 3 guys capable of leading over there and I can't wait to see that team get a new manager and a makeover (correct me if I'm wrong but he's done after this year?) because maybe, just maybe they'll all figure it out that at the end of the day Ullrich is still better then them and they will support him


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

Ever heard of leaving what you read in context? It wasn't even about body weight to begin with.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

"He shows no passion/grit/emotion/hardship at all. Many people like to see someone struggle to achieve, not do it without any apparent investment."

His racing face may not show it. Maybe in order to appreciate how he has worked and struggled, people need to be one of the unfortunate ones with a chemo drip as an alarm clock. Then it won't take much imagination to appreciate the passion/grit/emotion/hardship. 



"He is a one-trick pony. Yeah, yeah, I've seen the Palmares further up the thread - but come on - the Dauphine, the Ride for the Roses (his own charity pootle) and other races hardly put in the same league as Merckx who raced EVERYTHING there was to race. I'm not saying he isn't good, but it is an insult to compare him and his riding to a man who entered a full season. Say he is the best TDF rider ever if you must, but don't suggest he is the best rider ever - he's not even in the top 10."

That doesn't explain why people don't hold the same against Jan, Tyler, Museauw, etc. But I agree, those who blindly declare him the all-time greatest contribute to the stigma.

"He comes across as arrogant - I know Americans seem to think that the French are arrogant, but the rest of world thinks America holds that crown (rightly or wrongly - not my opinion) and therefore he is disliked purely because of which passport he holds."

If I put myself in the French shoes, I could easily see why they don't care for him. 
1. He was seen as the TDF savior in the wake of their own best team Festina was seen as the downfall. 
2. French had hopes on Virenque in '99, and Lance dashed those hopes. 
3. Another year, their national champ, Francois Simon made them proud by getting the yellow. Lance strips the yellow off of him by leaving him sucking his handlebar tape on a mountain finish. 
4. Laurent Jalabert gives them hope and joy with a couple solo mountain breakaways. Both times, Lance ends the party by passing him with ease. 
5. Volkler was last year's hero. Lance is the one to end his days in yellow. 
Man, now that I look at this, it seems like you'd have to be a dispassionate French corpse to not hold a grudge. 

"He has popularised a sport that some people love for it's niche status. There is a pleasure in seeing another lone rider and the knowing nod you exchange - some people don't want hordes of part-timers making us all seem common and ordinary."

I never thought of this, but you're right. Here in Maine, I don't have that problem. I've only see one other roadie in all my trips, a 60-yr old fit looking dude in a Lemond era Bell helmet and Spinachi bars and a yellow jersey (the kind you WIN in a Cat??race, not the kind you buy in a store) He looks like he could ride until he turns 90.


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

...I'm not so sure about that...the majority of non-american fans simply miss having a guy of their own to cheer for. It's much more about that than any type of animosity they might feel toward Lance. For instance, in the latest German TV poll about 75% of the people think Jan is done for this year. They feel let down and disappointed that the race is over for them so soon. Basically no sane person is hating Lance because of it.


----------



## iktome (Aug 29, 2003)

divve said:


> Ever heard of leaving what you read in context? It wasn't even about body weight to begin with.


What he's trying to say is: "I'm just smarter than you and you don't understand the genius of my subtlety" or some similar bulls--t. 

What he really means is: "I was serious, but [ironically] I realize that my comment displays my idiocy at it's finest, so I'd better backtrack a bit...."


----------



## patchito (Jun 30, 2005)

iktome said:


> What he's trying to say is: "I'm just smarter than you and you don't understand the genius of my subtlety" or some similar bulls--t.
> 
> What he really means is: "I was serious, but [ironically] I realize that my comment displays my idiocy at it's finest, so I'd better backtrack a bit...."


Thank you...and nice summary analysis. I just didn't have the energy.


----------



## esbike (Jul 4, 2005)

Jesse D Smith said:


> There was an even earlier era before mountain bikes had their day in the sun.
> I'll believe todays bikes have a better ride when someone shows me the data. Better components? How much longer will a Dura-Ace 10-sp integrated shifter last than a Dura-Ace 8-sp downtube shifter? How long does a 10sp chain last compared to an 8-speed chain? How many times can you drop a carbon bike and ride away vs. an older steel bike? How much superior is a carbon fork when it's sheered in half? How expensive is it to repair a funky botique wheel vs a 32h traditional wheel? How much easier or affordable is it to service an integrated headset vs. a threaded headset? I agree the boom has improved the value of equipment. Older Time Equipe pedals are selling for very high prices on EBAY because their no longer available for Time. A riders tried and true comfortable NOS quality '80's saddle is a wise investment considering what's being offered today and the fact that it's been pushed out of the market by the fred's demand for a carbon speculum.
> 
> In 2001, Colorado Cyclist sold Carnac Legend shoes. In the product description, they described them as "Carnac's most popular model." In 2002, they discontinued them, making room for the triple and quadrouple strap fad, which everybody assumed would be superior, which in turn was discontinued in favor of the buckle and strap era. Rather than be upfront greedy, and charge more for the same proven thing, it's more palatable to drop current models and push the next greatest thing +$100. OK, maybe I'm bitter, but when a shoe fits like Cinderella's slipper, and they get taken away, you take it personally.
> ...


What?! Shows you the data on a better ride? If you need "data" to figure out what ride you like, I think you are lost already. As far as steel vs.carbon, here's a news flash for you: steel is still available. Good news for you! And a custom steel bike with 853 is probably a lot cheaper now in relative terms than it ever was. And if you don't like dura ace 10 speed you can get 105 in 9 speed that is probably nicer than ancient 8 speed stuff. I'm sorry they cancelled your favorite shoes. But don't blame freds for that. My point is that a larger market for bikes in general brings cheaper prices (not higher) and encourages technological developments that would otherwise be prohibitively expensive. This is true in all industries.


----------



## Buckman (Jul 6, 2005)

Jesse D Smith said:


> In 2001, Colorado Cyclist sold Carnac Legend shoes. In the product description, they described them as "Carnac's most popular model." In 2002, they discontinued them, making room for the triple and quadrouple strap fad, which everybody assumed would be superior, which in turn was discontinued in favor of the buckle and strap era. Rather than be upfront greedy, and charge more for the same proven thing, it's more palatable to drop current models and push the next greatest thing +$100. OK, maybe I'm bitter, but when a shoe fits like Cinderella's slipper, and they get taken away, you take it personally.


It's the same with running shoes my man-ask any runner. You finally after years of searching find shoes that you love and six months later they are nowhere to be found when you try and find another pair.


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

iktome said:


> What he's trying to say is: "I'm just smarter than you and you don't understand the genius of my subtlety" or some similar bulls--t.
> 
> What he really means is: "I was serious, but [ironically] I realize that my comment displays my idiocy at it's finest, so I'd better backtrack a bit...."





patchito said:


> Thank you...and nice summary analysis. I just didn't have the energy.


Stating out of the blue that you're 150lbs and reiterating it once again further down the thread with an elaborate BMI percentile bracket story is rather bizarre in itself. I feel no need to backtrack for pointing that out.


----------

