[CYCLING] Tour de France 2005 Thread

That's messed up. But it'll be all the more sweeter when Lance kicks their @$$ in the tour de france.

 

How long until they get pissed and just taint one of his samples to prove their point?

Dude would be crazy to be doping since he is under such a microscope.

 

<insert SJC Armstrong doping alligation article here>

 

FYI, Lance actually funds anti-doping efforts with his own, personal money.

From PezCygling News: UCI president Hein Verbruggen spoke to ‘Eurosport’ and divulged that the American “gave money for the research against doping, to discover new anti-doping methods," “He gave money from his private funds, cash. He didn't want this to be known but he did it".

Also, today on the first stage (an individual time trial) Lance caught up and passed Jan Ullrich and ended up in second place behind American Dave Zabriskie (CSC).

In individual Time Trials each cyclist rides by himself in a race against the clock. There is no drafting or team support. Just you and the road going all out for as long as you can stand it. They start each rider one minute apart. Jan Ullrich was second to last and Lance, being last years TDF winner, started last. Lance rode so fast that he actually caught up to Jan Ullrich and passed him on the road. What's even more amazing is that even with that effort he didn't win. Another American won. That puts three Americans in the top five: 1) Zabriskie, 2) Armstrong, 4)George Hincapie. It's a good day for U.S. cycling.

 

don't forget Floyd Landis is in 6th

 

WARNING BLANTANT JINGOISTIC AMERICAN CA-CA


Of course, Lance Armstrong will win the Tour again....I don't think there is any doubt.

It will be effortless...just like America winning the World Cup would be effortless, if 5 percent of the US cared about the sport and soccer got even 5th choice of the best athletes in the US.


Carry on

 

Lance comment - Sure
Soccer comment - You're pulling stuff out of your ass.

 

Eh....maybe so...but I think if Soccer/Football was #1 in the US..guys like MJ, Kobe, TO etc would put some heat on some goaltenders. I may be mistaken, but would be interesting to see.

Sorry for derailing the TDF thread....go Lance.

 

Lance looks like a winner again, and its only day one.

 

"That puts three Americans in the top five: 1) Zabriskie, 2) Armstrong, 4)George Hincapie. It's a good day for U.S. cycling."
______________

All American athletes are obviously on dope.
______

Lance stays with leader...

 

I remembered that Lance's strong suit is in the mountain areas. That he tends to be in the pack during the early stages. If so, the 7th straight win looks pretty good right about now.

 

Don't jinx him!

 

Yup. It's not cancer in the testicles, abdomen and brain that'll bring Lance Armstrong down. It'll be a post on a Rockets BBS!!!

 

Lance wears the yellow as his team wins the team time trial yet again.

 

I don't think in biking there are any upstarts that come out of nowhere, so I think he'll win, but someday, you know someone is gonna come along and be just as good in the mountains. You just wonder when and who.

 

You asked, you shall receive...

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...rrissey,1,2338968.column?coll=cs-home-utility

Armstrong's been great, but doubt still there
Rick Morrissey

July 2, 2005

Lance Armstrong is the feel-good sports story of the last 10 years. It's the story of a bicycle racer who beats cancer and rides to victory again and again.

And every time I see his photo on the cover of a magazine or see his name in a newspaper headline, I immediately think, "But what if?"

What if the accusations of performance-enhancing drug use are true?

What if we're paying homage to a cheat?

What if, 10 years from now, we find out that what we had hero-worshipped was, in essence, a syringe full of drugs? What do we do then? Can we get our hearts back the way we might get our money back for a defective toaster?

Please understand Armstrong has passed every drug test he has taken and calls himself the most-tested athlete in the history of sports. Also understand the skepticism about his accomplishments is as much a sorry reflection of where we are in sports as it is on Armstrong. There has been so much cheating that everyone is a suspect.

Pick an athlete and raise an eyebrow.

When Congress was browbeating baseball for its soft drug-testing policy and questionable power numbers earlier this year, the White Sox's Frank Thomas was held up as the other side of the coin, the player who did things the right way, the natural way, presumably through hard work and protein shakes. If the field had been level and steroid use hadn't been so rampant, experts said, how much better would Thomas' numbers seem now?

Anybody who has watched Thomas play throughout his career knows he always has been big—he was big when he was little, as they say. And yet, there's this tiny voice inside me saying, "But how do we know for sure he has been clean?"

And it angers me to think that way. Angers me that I've become that skeptical and angers me that sports has turned into a game of shadows.

But after saying all that, this is the thought I can't shake as Armstrong begins his quest for a seventh Tour de France victory: What if the guy who likes to LiveStrong isn't living right? Then what do we do with all the flowery tributes we have sent his way?

A former personal assistant who sued Armstrong earlier this year for breach of contract said he found a banned substance in Armstrong's apartment. Armstrong called it "character assassination" and filed a countersuit. Armstrong also is suing the authors of a book that raises more doping questions about the superstar racer.

Rumors of blood-doping have been around Armstrong since he started dominating the Tour in 1999.

You're right: Innuendo isn't fair. But this is where we are. Rampant cheating has led to cynicism about everything and almost everyone. It's too bad for the athletes and too bad for the viewing public.

(I have a new definition of what a legitimate sport is: If you can take a drug other than Viagra to improve your performance, it's a sport.)

You don't have to work hard to make a case for a drug-free Armstrong. His success did not come out of nowhere. He has a heart that is almost a third larger than a normal man's, and his resting heart rate is 32 beats per minute. In other words, he's built perfectly for endurance events.

You don't have to work hard to make a case for a kind-hearted Armstrong. He showed steely determination when he was diagnosed with testicular cancer in 1996 and since has raised tens of millions of dollars for cancer research. He should be everything that's good in sports.

There's a tenet we Americans embrace. It says a person is innocent until proven guilty. But if I were in the shoes of the writers charged to cover Armstrong's going-away Tour (he's retiring after this race), I would show some reserve. There's no tenet that says a person is the Human of the Century until proven guilty.

So while all the glowing prose will be written over the next three weeks—while all the testimonials and retrospectives are being worked up—there's that voice that won't shut up. It keeps saying, "Yeah, but…"

I would temper the tributes a bit, even at the risk of snuffing out a flame that deserves to burn brightly. We're kind of stuck, we writers. I notice it in the way we put our shoulders down and head right into the drama of this story. We want to do right by the guy.

But what if we've been had? Just asking the question depresses me.

 

I think these writers should get together and try to figure out how to save Slate, but that's another story...
_________

Tour de Bore

How to revive the world's biggest cycling race.
...

The Tour de France is boring for one big reason: the French. Each year, the organizers—an outfit called the Amaury Sport Organisation—try to devise a race that Armstrong can't win. But, being French, they are too wrapped up in tradition to alter the template. The Tour is spectacle over substance, a sporting son et lumière.
...

This year, the Tour organizers took a different tack: They made the race easier. The theory is that with just one individual time trial and relatively few selective mountain stages, there will be more riders in the lead pack at the stage finishes, and Armstrong will have to work harder to secure and defend his lead. Could be. But when Tour chief Jean-Marie Leblanc described the route as "classic," Tour-watchers knew exactly what he meant. That classic template—flat stages, time trial, mountain stages—will remain intact.
...

Here's my four-point plan for bringing some joie de vivre back to the Tour de France.

Make the mountains count: There are seven mountain stages this year, but only three of them finish on climbs, where the contenders generally ditch the pretenders. (Pay special attention to Stage 10 on July 12 and Stage 14 on July 16.) Compared to those used in other European cycling races, French mountain roads aren't all that steep. The ballyhooed Alpe d'Huez, which is absent from this year's race, averages less than an 8 percent grade. It's a handicap-access ramp compared to Spain's dreaded Angliru, which kicks up to 23 percent, and Italy's Colle delle Finestre, whose last five miles are unpaved. The solution: quantity over quality. Put mountain stages in the first week. And there are undoubtedly still a few dirt mountain roads in France—the organizers should have the daring to use one.

Lose the dope … and the race radios: Since the 1970s, the average speed of the race has crept steadily upward, from just over 20 miles per hour to just under 25. This is partly because the bikes are better and lighter, and partly because of, um, improved training methods. The fast pace means it's now much harder for an individual or small group to break away from the field. And when riders do get away, the others hear all about it in their radio earpieces. The team directors consult their laptops and tell the chasers how fast to ride to catch the leaders before the finish—which is precisely what happens, nine times out of 10. So much for drama.

Ban the French: Traditionally, French riders have made up much of the field, especially since the organizers generally give "wild card" spots to mediocre French teams. Their numbers are down a bit this year, but there are still gobs of them: 30 of 189 riders. The sad truth is that French cyclists just aren't that good. The last one to win the race was Bernard Hinault, in 1985. Are the French bitter about this? Bien sûr. But they still won't crack the top five this year, and they're taking the spots of racers who might actually do something.

Lance must lose: No matter how inspiring his back-from-cancer life story may be, or how impressive his winning streak, Armstrong's long reign has sucked some of the life out of the race. If last year is any indication, the six-time champ will race defensively, like a hockey team killing a penalty. When he gets the leader's yellow jersey—not "if"—his ruthless Discovery Channel-sponsored squad will simply take control of the race, and only the most determined and insane riders (like Kazakh bandit Alexandre Vinokourov) will dare to attack.

Slate de Bore

 

Maybe they do need some dirt, grass, clay, and some x-game like terrain just to throw in some monkey wrenches.

 

What time does the tour start in the AM of July 6th?