Congratulations to Lance Armstrong

I'm sure he has it wrapped up, but we may actually see an attack tomorrow from Ullrich. I don't think there is any possiblity for Jan to make up 65 seconds in Paris though.

WAY TO GO LANCE!

 

nah, Ullrich won't attack on Sunday - I think back in 1989 the lead was only 8 seconds going into the final day and the second place guy didn't attack.

Ullrich rode a damn good race, and he's a hell of a classy guy - Armstrong too - and it sucks that he fell, but for all intents and purposes Armstrong won the Tour de France.

 

Jan needs 75 seconds.

 

After Stage 15 when Lance fell and then got back up, passed up everyone including the leader who had a 5 plus minute lead, and won the stage I knew he had it in the bag.


This was the first tour that I actually got to watch, and Stage 15 was the first stage I watched, what a race.


He is amazing.

 

Yep, it just pissed him off.

Greatest American athlete of our time.

 

why even have a last stage if the 2nd place rider doesnt attack? I know it's tradition, just doesnt make sense to me...

just like the whole letting the leader catch up thing if he crashes...

 

To be fair, it probably started as a practical thing, not something symbolic. The stage really isn't long enough, or difficult enough to seperate yourself from the peleton - and the ride to the finish is hard enough for a footrace, much less a bicycle one, it would be a hundred-rider accident waiting to happen.

 

Lance is so badass. On the list of sports I am interested in, cycling ranks just above soccer, which is at the bottom of the list. But when the Tour De France comes around, I always pay close attention to how Lance does...just because he is so amazing. Hell of an athlete.

 

puedfor....

that makes sense I didn't realize it was a shorter stage etc....

If I was the guy that was only 8 seconds behind going into the last day, I would be tempted to say forget all that and try to win the whole thing..

I wonder where they draw the line. if someone is two seconds behind, I guess he'd still let the leader win

 

Trust me had it been close there would have been an attack. But usually you can't gain much on a flat stage when the peloton watches you like a hawk. Pued got it the wrong way. In 89 the gap was only 8 seconds and the man in 2nd (Greg LeMond) covered those 8 seconds and won overall. That time the last stage was a time trial though.

But the last stage is a real stage, and it is very prestigous to win it, but usually the gap from the overall leader to the 2nd guy is too much for it to be covered. Tomorrow you will see a real race among the sprinters to win the stage, but there is no way Ullrich could cover the 1 minute 16 seconds he has to cover, as as soon as he attack 9 US postal riders is there to ride him down. That way the final stage in Paris have become a ceremonal ride where noone challenges the overall all lead, as no one can manage to challenge the overall lead. This holds true for more than the last stage really if you think about it - all attacks come in the mountains, the flat stages are for the sprinters to fight over or riders far far behind in the overall standings to go on breaks (and they can as the yellow jersey has no need to hunt them down, but as soon as a dangerous rider tries to break there is plenty of riders from several teams to work together to catch the break).

 

well then, ignore what I said about 89 then - I heard it on OLN - thought it was right.

But I still stand by the fact that the race was going to be decided in the Time Trial - Ullrich probably wouldn't have attacked going into Paris. Perhaps he may have entertained thoughts - but he wouldn't have attacked into Paris, it would've been impractical.

Edit : I googled 89 up. It was the only time since 75 the tour hasn't ended going into Paris, and Lemond made up 50 seconds in the last time trial to win by 8 seconds.

 

Edit : I googled 89 up. It was the only time since 75 the tour hasn't ended going into Paris, and Lemond made up 50 seconds in the last time trial to win by 8 seconds.

****


The looser of that tour (dont remember his name - french dude - fignon? or something) still doesnt like to talk about it, as lemond did not win it on equal terms, he introduced a better bike for that single stage (the extra handlebars they use now all the time in time trials and had an enourmous advantage)

Had both had the same bike, Lemond would not have been able to win it.

 

But all this aside - the tour is always decided on time trials and mountain stages - never on flat stages, as the top of the leaderboard teams would never allow anyone to attack their position on a flat stage and pass up their #1 guy.

 

heath.. ok that makes sense. so the not attacking on the last stage thing they talk about is more or less because generally the lead is too much to catch up to, and not some "tradition"

thanks for the info, i've never watched any of this until this year in which I've paid more attention. I didn't even know I had the outdoor life network until a few weeks ago.. I don't know when they added that. I was watching the running of the bulls on that station the other day as well

 

I can't stand Lance Armstrong . But he has more guts than Jan, who has more talent (that's what Armstrong said about him). So, congrats.

 

BOOOOurns...

 

COngrats to Armstrong...

 

I only ask you this b/c I can't imagine what it is. Not that it makes a big difference, but could you tell me why you can't stand a guy who is in a sport that is not highly publicized and other than his sport, he only appears in a commmercial or two a year?

I can understand a player in a major sport b/c you actually have to spend an extended period of time seeing the individual during the season thus you know more about and see more of him. This is a person we hear about for 3 weeks out of a year on a very limited basis.