RBR-TDF Fred here as in I frequent RBR once a year for 3 weeks to check in on what people are saying about the TDF and to get a good laugh. And like many of you, I know how to and enjoy riding my bike. Questions:

Have some of you guys actually met and spent time with Lance Armstrong and have a good idea of what Lance is really like based on personal contact with him? With all the "I don't like Lance's personality" quotes I've read from the RBR experts/regulars the last 3 weeks on this forum, it seems like may of you have met spent some time with and are very well acquainted with Lance and his personality? Are many of you personal friends of Lance or are you basing your dislike of his personality on what you get from the media? Did Lance do something to you personally (ride by you and flip you off, ignored your autograph request, dissed your girlfriend etc etc) that caused you to have such a negative opinion of his personality? I know many of you are sick of all the coverage the now 7 time TDF winner has gotten this year, but do you honestly believe that you can comment on LA's personality without even having met or spent time with the man based on what you've read/heard? C'mon.

How do you know that World War II even happened? Were you there?

RBR-TDF Fred here as in I frequent RBR once a year for 3 weeks to check in on what people are saying about the TDF and to get a good laugh. And like many of you, I know how to and enjoy riding my bike. Questions:

Have some of you guys actually met and spent time with Lance Armstrong and have a good idea of what Lance is really like based on personal contact with him? With all the "I don't like Lance's personality" quotes I've read from the RBR experts/regulars the last 3 weeks on this forum, it seems like may of you have met spent some time with and are very well acquainted with Lance and his personality? Are many of you personal friends of Lance or are you basing your dislike of his personality on what you get from the media? Did Lance do something to you personally (ride by you and flip you off, ignored your autograph request, dissed your girlfriend etc etc) that caused you to have such a negative opinion of his personality? I know many of you are sick of all the coverage the now 7 time TDF winner has gotten this year, but do you honestly believe that you can comment on LA's personality without even having met or spent time with the man based on what you've read/heard? C'mon.
Do you miss the irony that the same could be said for virtually everyone who's an Armsrtong supporter?

I'm tired of all the whiners and detractors out there. In 10 years, they'll all be yearning for the "good old days" when Armstrong DOMINATED for 7 TDF's.

I have yet to see a CREDIBLE piece of journalism out there that would show Armstrong to be anything other than a 100% class act. Maybe we've all heard the whole story a few too many times, but that doesn't diminish his accomplishments any.

God forbid, Joe average American knows who Lance Armstrong is (and admires him), not just the cycling elite. Guess we'd better go distance ourselves from him to perserve our elite and aloof status.

How do you know that World War II even happened? Were you there?

It's like comparnig Quantum Physics with Shakespear. Yeah, pretty much the same thing here. Catch a clue here...

This is the typical "Type A" cycling personality on display.

Lance has achieved greater things by accident than most of us can ever dream of doing deliberately. His worst day on a bike would be most of our greatest. What he has done to bring cancer survivorship to the forefront is truly remarkable. Now, individuals with cancer have an actual person they can identify with who kicked the affliction and became a better person for it. Can 50,000,000 yellow bracelets be wrong? What significant sporting achievement or contribution to the betterment of mankind have you done lately?

I think that Lance is a class act that history will write good things about. I believe that I will never witness such domination in the sport of cycling for the rest of my life. I am just glad to have seen it. Thank you for the memories, Lance!

People will clamor for Armstrong to come out of retirement at 41 to tie Basso's record.



I'm tired of all the whiners and detractors out there. In 10 years, they'll all be yearning for the "good old days" when Armstrong DOMINATED for 7 TDF's.

People will clamor for Armstrong to come out of retirement at 41 to tie Basso's record.

I hope you're right!!. I think Basso has a lot of class as well. Look at how he stuck it out in the Gyro after losing fourty odd minutes on one stage from stomach ailments two win a couple of stages. Meanwhile, a bunch of the sprinters had abandoned because they didn't like the mountains. Next year I'm going to have a hard time not pulling for CSC. Especially if Bobby Julich stays on.

There's an interesting article in Velo News on more than 5-time champions within the last year. The upshot of their point is all the 5-time champions have been since the 1960's, and with racing becoming more specialized and people focusing more on fewer races, Lance was probably the first of the more than five champions, not the last. They even went so far as to pick Basso as the next.

I hope you're right!!. I think Basso has a lot of class as well. Look at how he stuck it out in the Gyro after losing fourty odd minutes on one stage from stomach ailments two win a couple of stages. Meanwhile, a bunch of the sprinters had abandoned because they didn't like the mountains. Next year I'm going to have a hard time not pulling for CSC. Especially if Bobby Julich stays on.

There's an interesting article in Velo News on more than 5-time champions within the last year. The upshot of their point is all the 5-time champions have been since the 1960's, and with racing becoming more specialized and people focusing more on fewer races, Lance was probably the first of the more than five champions, not the last. They even went so far as to pick Basso as the next.

Perhaps not as specialized as Lance, though. After all, Basso raced the Giro this year.

It's like comparnig Quantum Physics with Shakespear. Yeah, pretty much the same thing here. Catch a clue here...
Ha ha! thanks!

Do you miss the irony that the same could be said for virtually everyone who's an Armsrtong supporter?
I'm talking about the people who claim they don't like Lance's personality who act like they have spent enough time with him in person to come to that conclusion. I think there are a lot of Lance supporters like myself who simply enjoy watching an athlete at the top of his game, not to mention admire his involvement in the fight against cancer. See y'all next July.

See y'all next July.

What a true Armstrong fan.

What a true Armstrong fan.

What a true cycling snob.

This is the typical "Type A" cycling personality on display.

Lance has achieved greater things by accident than most of us can ever dream of doing deliberately. His worst day on a bike would be most of our greatest. What he has done to bring cancer survivorship to the forefront is truly remarkable. Now, individuals with cancer have an actual person they can identify with who kicked the affliction and became a better person for it. Can 50,000,000 yellow bracelets be wrong? What significant sporting achievement or contribution to the betterment of mankind have you done lately?

I think that Lance is a class act that history will write good things about. I believe that I will never witness such domination in the sport of cycling for the rest of my life. I am just glad to have seen it. Thank you for the memories, Lance!

I respect Lance as a human. I respect Lance as a fighter. I respect Lance as a survivor. I respect Lance as an athlete. I respect Lance as a cyclist. I do not respect Lance as a racer. We have not seen him dominate the sport of cycling. We have seen him dominate one event. The Tour is a great race, but it is not the entirety of cycling. There are dozens of other races he never even tried. His accomplishment is great, but don't make it out to be more than it is.

I respect Lance as a human. I respect Lance as a fighter. I respect Lance as a survivor. I respect Lance as an athlete. I respect Lance as a cyclist. I do not respect Lance as a racer. We have not seen him dominate the sport of cycling. We have seen him dominate one event. The Tour is a great race, but it is not the entirety of cycling. There are dozens of other races he never even tried. His accomplishment is great, but don't make it out to be more than it is.

You must not repsect many racers then because LA's overall record is pretty good. Given what dominating the Tour has done for Lance it's a wonder others just didn't do what Lance has done. OR MAYBE THE OTHERS COULDN'T. I'm sure there are very few racers in the last 15 years who wouldn't trade careers with LA.

Perhaps not as specialized as Lance, though. After all, Basso raced the Giro this year.
my prediction is that basso doesn't waste time with the giro next year, he will focus on the one that matters now that lance is gone. di luca will win the next giro. why race the giro if you can win the tdf?

You must not repsect many racers then because LA's overall record is pretty good. Given what dominating the Tour has done for Lance it's a wonder others just didn't do what Lance has done. OR MAYBE THE OTHERS COULDN'T. I'm sure there are very few racers in the last 15 years who wouldn't trade careers with LA.

You're missing the point. The point is, and this has been true since the LeMond days, so it's not unique to "99ers," that it is only in those countries without a rich tradition in the sport (and France, of course) that the Tour de France is this important. The idea that TdF=Super Bowl may be uniquely American. Certainly it's the only race most Americans have ever heard of.

For example, for an Italian riding for an Italian team, it's actually more important to win the Giro. For a Belgian to win any Grand Tour would be huge, but winning the Tour of Flanders and LBL are right up there.

Form the perspective of someone who doesn't buy into the idea that the Tour is the only important race on the calendar, the fact that LA never won much of anything else is a valid criticism, and to me, the biggest hole in his legacy. But, given that most Americans don't feel that way, his (and the sponsors') decisions make sense.

I'd have still liked to see him win the Giro.

--Shannon

my prediction is that basso doesn't waste time with the giro next year, he will focus on the one that matters now that lance is gone. di luca will win the next giro. why race the giro if you can win the tdf?

Riis would like Basso to skip the Giro. Basso may have a different take on it. One thing I would bet on though, if he does skip the Giro and wins the Tour he will go for the double in 2007.

His performance this year clearly shot down the B.S. assertion that starting in 1999 it suddenly became impossible to do well in the Tour if you raced the Giro.

Riis would like Basso to skip the Giro. Basso may have a different take on it. One thing I would bet on though, if he does skip the Giro and wins the Tour he will go for the double in 2007.

His performance this year clearly shot down the B.S. assertion that starting in 1999 it suddenly became impossible to do well in the Tour if you raced the Giro.
remember he didn't "race" the entire giro - he rode much of it very poorly. so i'm not convinced about the specialization just yet. when someone wins a double i'll be persuaded. if i were riis i would plan for the tdf only next year, especially with ullrichs enormous strength at the end of the tdf. if ju doesn't hit a car (or barn or whatever) he will be difficult to beat.

You're missing the point. The point is, and this has been true since the LeMond days, so it's not unique to "99ers," that it is only in those countries without a rich tradition in the sport (and France, of course) that the Tour de France is this important. The idea that TdF=Super Bowl may be uniquely American. Certainly it's the only race most Americans have ever heard of.

For example, for an Italian riding for an Italian team, it's actually more important to win the Giro. For a Belgian to win any Grand Tour would be huge, but winning the Tour of Flanders and LBL are right up there.

Form the perspective of someone who doesn't buy into the idea that the Tour is the only important race on the calendar, the fact that LA never won much of anything else is a valid criticism, and to me, the biggest hole in his legacy. But, given that most Americans don't feel that way, his (and the sponsors') decisions make sense.

I'd have still liked to see him win the Giro.

--Shannon

i may be just making this up, but my perception is that the tdf brings out a bigger cross-section of riders. the giro is overwhelmingly italian, the vuelta is filled with the spanish/basque. and i don't think that heras got shelled last year because the vuelta was so much more important to his team/countrymen. simoni may have lost his legs though.

everyone competes like hell in the tdf. seems like people only skip the tdf because they are injured or exhausted. and nobody rides it for the"training".

for me the tdf is the most exciting tour, by far. i enjoy the classics season just as much. the giro and vuelta are ok. giro better than vuelta though. i don't think it has anything to do with me being american, the other tours just don't really bring out the zeal in the riders like the tdf. or at least it doesn't look that way - and its all about appearances from this side of the television.

the other tours just don't really bring out the zeal in the riders like the tdf. or at least it doesn't look that way - and its all about appearances from this side of the television.
But what you're seeing is filtered through the perspective of the American media, take a look at a copies of Gazzetta dello Sport during the T our de France and Giro d'Italia and you'd get a much different perspective.

Yup. Watch RAI (commercial free, i might add) during the Giro and it is absolutely phenomenal.

remember he didn't "race" the entire giro - he rode much of it very poorly.

I wonder if his poor performances in the Giro had anything to do with his vomiting throughout stages 13 and 14. Just thinking out loud here...

You're missing the point. The point is, and this has been true since the LeMond days, so it's not unique to "99ers," that it is only in those countries without a rich tradition in the sport (and France, of course) that the Tour de France is this important. The idea that TdF=Super Bowl may be uniquely American. Certainly it's the only race most Americans have ever heard of.

For example, for an Italian riding for an Italian team, it's actually more important to win the Giro. For a Belgian to win any Grand Tour would be huge, but winning the Tour of Flanders and LBL are right up there.

Form the perspective of someone who doesn't buy into the idea that the Tour is the only important race on the calendar, the fact that LA never won much of anything else is a valid criticism, and to me, the biggest hole in his legacy. But, given that most Americans don't feel that way, his (and the sponsors') decisions make sense.

I'd have still liked to see him win the Giro.

--Shannon

Its people who claim he's hasn't won anything important besides the Tour who are the ones guilty of focussing solely on the Tour, labeling US national Championship, Tour of Georgia, Tour de Pont, one-week Tours, and World Championships as insignificant.
I'd cut and past his "not much of anything else" palmares, but I don't want to hog all the bandwidth. You might want to look it up yourself, then rethink your opinion.

IMO, again IMO its really a slippery slope to assign personality qualities based on an individuals athletic performance. Great athletes are not always great people.

Every sport has the same thing. Have a chat with Dan Marino, what a swell guy. (NOT).

However, WHO CARES? If an athlete is advertising a product or political cause, do you blame them when the politics ruins the project? Wow Lance, you were there at the Cold Fusion helping humanity picnic. So, what are you doing about this Cold Fusion issue?

Unless I missed it, Lance is not a physicist, an engineer, a mathmetician or really anything very much in the way of actually tackling the issue of Cold Fusion. He is in fact a talking head. Thats it.

If you want to know the people, great. However, they are just that. People.

i may be just making this up, but my perception is that the tdf brings out a bigger cross-section of riders. the giro is overwhelmingly italian, the vuelta is filled with the spanish/basque. and i don't think that heras got shelled last year because the vuelta was so much more important to his team/countrymen. simoni may have lost his legs though.

everyone competes like hell in the tdf. seems like people only skip the tdf because they are injured or exhausted. and nobody rides it for the"training".

for me the tdf is the most exciting tour, by far. i enjoy the classics season just as much. the giro and vuelta are ok. giro better than vuelta though. i don't think it has anything to do with me being american, the other tours just don't really bring out the zeal in the riders like the tdf. or at least it doesn't look that way - and its all about appearances from this side of the television.



You are right, the other tours do not hold the weight to the TDF. In the Giro and the Vuelta, riders are much more likely to drop out either to not waste their season or because they want to wrap up their season. Riders would never drop out of the TDF unless they had to due to serious injury or illness.

I know lots of very competitive people.

Based on what I have seen of Lance Armstrong through the media, he appears to be the "typical" driven, type A personality. Lance Armstrong did not win seven Tours because he was stronger physically -- I think that Ulrich is physically stronger than Armstrong. He won seven Tours because of his preparation, focus and drive. In my personal experience with other type A, successful people, they can be quite personable and charming when it furthers their program and quite the opposite when it does not.

Jonathan Vaughters has an article about Lance Armstrong in the guide that one of the British cycling magazines put out prior to the Tour (I think it was Cycling Weekly, but I an not sure). I tried to find a link to it online, but I could not. The basic point of the article is that Armstrong has a binary view of the world and people. Everything is either a "1" or a "0". And, ultimately Vaughters was a "0" in Lance's book. The article is a worthwhile read -- if anyone has a link or copy of it, please post it. I think that when you consider even what those who know Armstrong say about him, you need to take into account whether the speaker is a "1" or a "0".

At the end of the day, whether Armstrong is a saint or an @sshole, the fact is irrelevant. He has won the Tour de France seven times in a row, overcoming many obtacles that would have felled almost anyone else. That in and of itself is something worth honoring.

I have been involved with LAs foundation for six years. In that time I have had the occasion to ride with LA, chat with him, have my picture taken with him, introduce him to my family, have him meet my brother-in-law who had colon cancer and take home a little hope, (he died four weeks ago, btw, so I am ever grateful to LA that he stood with and talked to Ron), sat next to him for photos, and had my bike autographed by him. I will be in Austin again this October to be a part of an overwhelmingly important event for cancer survivors, the Ride for the Roses, where I will talk to him, have my photo taken with him, etc., etc,.

As a competitive cyclist, LA has a one-track mind, and that is to win. And to do so by planning more, working harder, and executing tactics better than his rivals. As a man outside the peloton, he is gracious, thoughtful, open to people, funny, and incredibly thankful and humbled by the thousands who have taken up his cause.

LA is one of the most famous people in the world today, so he is bound to have his share of critics. Success always breeds criticism, especially by those who are jealous that the success was not theirs. But to dislike a man simply because he hasn't met one's definition of "great", or whatever other personal criticism one might have of him, seems rather shallow.

LA is, above all, human, with shortcomings and failings like all of us. But the good he has accomplished with his fame, with his belief in the "obligation of the cured", transcends the spurious claims that he has somehow not met the appropriate standards for greatness because he never raced Paris Roubaix. I could only hope that, given the same kind of attention paid to me that LA has had paid to him, I would have half the dignity and grace he has had in answering his critics and working beyond their invidious accusations.

No, I don't know Lance Armstrong, and perhaps that is the problem. If I am to believe OLN's hagiography, Armstrong is, simultaneously, an all conquering cycling champion who heals lepers, feeds the poor and saves kittens out of trees. I don't "blame" Armstrong for the coverage/portrayal, I doubt he views himself that way, and I doubt even more he asked for it, but for three weeks that is what we were bombarded with from OLN. And that is not "normal" national sports coverage of a Superbowl level event - Al Michaels and John Madden don't constantly refer to players by their first name (a broadcasting 101 rule) or openly root for one team (another broadcasting 101 rule), yet are still intimately knowledgeable about the game and its players. I am failry certain that I stopped rooting for Armstrong when both Al Trautwig and Bob Roll started belittling Ullrich (particularly Roll's Hogan's Heroes-esque German accent, of Ullrich wanting more strudel or whatever). Ullrich actually has won the TdF, but we were told he was basically insane to think he could win it again, or even seriously compete, that no one really knew why he, or any of the other "pretenders" (i.e. Basso, Vinokourov, Leipheimer) even showed up to race the all conquering Armstrong. Or perhaps it was when Carmichel noted that Armstrong wears a Nike heart rate monitor during one of the Polar sponsored segments (what a great shill). Or, perhaps, it was the way the announcers would try to turn any conversation into an Armstrong topic (perhaps best illustrated when Trautwig, after Hincapie was on the podium after he had won a stage, asking Bob Roll (and I am paraphrasing here) "What does this mean to Lance Armstrong." One would think the question would be (and should be) "What does this mean for George Hincapie."

IMO, Armstrong would have been better served if he were not portrayed in the hagiographic light that OLN bathed him in. His story is, in and of itself, compelling and admirable. It doesn't need glossing over. But, b/c of said coverage, Armstrong does come accross as something of an egotistical, petty, spoiled ass. The exact opposite of what he probably is truly like, but HOW WOULD I KNOW? He would have been better served if OLN was more balanced and professional in its reporting.

But what you're seeing is filtered through the perspective of the American media, take a look at a copies of Gazzetta dello Sport during the T our de France and Giro d'Italia and you'd get a much different perspective.

ahh the american media that run the world. i doubt oln is in the bsiness of going out on a limb to show cycling that noone but us will watch and then making it purposefully underwhelming. that is just retarded. i watched as much of the giro on rai as i could just for the timing.

it doesn't change that the contnders were always di luca, savoldelli, simoni and the wildcard rujano (ok zabriskie was there too). it is still a totally nationalistic race (ahh, europe). the sprints were good though, petacchi seems to bring out the fire in other sprinters. i think i prefer msr to the giro.


//and no sh*t basso was sick, but he still didn't have to race the whole thing

I respect Lance as a human. I respect Lance as a fighter. I respect Lance as a survivor. I respect Lance as an athlete. I respect Lance as a cyclist. I do not respect Lance as a racer. We have not seen him dominate the sport of cycling. We have seen him dominate one event. The Tour is a great race, but it is not the entirety of cycling. There are dozens of other races he never even tried. His accomplishment is great, but don't make it out to be more than it is.

It's not like his TDF results are his only results in the course of his entire career. Before he won the Tour he had results. To not respect as a racer in inconsistent with the world of cycling. Even if it was just his World Championship, to me that's worthy of respect. UCI honors former champions by allowing them to wear the rainbow ban around their arms, though Lance has chosen not to do so. To not respect him as a racer is crazy. He has over 18 wins in muti-day events, has won at least 35 stages in these events plus a number of other one-day wins, 2nds, 3rds etc.

Lance's Career Highlights not including a 7th Tour win yesterday or individual stage wins in his multi-day events:


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

As for all the personality stuff, I don't think any of us would like someone coming to some firm judgment about who we are based on a relatively small amount of information. My 2cents!

I've known him for years, back when he was known as Stretch.
I had one of those and it popped the first day I had it. They came with these stupid little mini band aids in case that happened, but the goo always managed to leak out anyway. What a crappy toy that was.

Anyway...does anyone want some PIE?

I've known him for years, back when he was known as Stretch.

No, I don't know Lance Armstrong, and perhaps that is the problem. If I am to believe OLN's hagiography, Armstrong is, simultaneously, an all conquering cycling champion who heals lepers, feeds the poor and saves kittens out of trees. I don't "blame" Armstrong for the coverage/portrayal, I doubt he views himself that way, and I doubt even more he asked for it, but for three weeks that is what we were bombarded with from OLN. And that is not "normal" national sports coverage of a Superbowl level event - Al Michaels and John Madden don't constantly refer to players by their first name (a broadcasting 101 rule) or openly root for one team (another broadcasting 101 rule), yet are still intimately knowledgeable about the game and its players. I am failry certain that I stopped rooting for Armstrong when both Al Trautwig and Bob Roll started belittling Ullrich (particularly Roll's Hogan's Heroes-esque German accent, of Ullrich wanting more strudel or whatever). Ullrich actually has won the TdF, but we were told he was basically insane to think he could win it again, or even seriously compete, that no one really knew why he, or any of the other "pretenders" (i.e. Basso, Vinokourov, Leipheimer) even showed up to race the all conquering Armstrong. Or perhaps it was when Carmichel noted that Armstrong wears a Nike heart rate monitor during one of the Polar sponsored segments (what a great shill). Or, perhaps, it was the way the announcers would try to turn any conversation into an Armstrong topic (perhaps best illustrated when Trautwig, after Hincapie was on the podium after he had won a stage, asking Bob Roll (and I am paraphrasing here) "What does this mean to Lance Armstrong." One would think the question would be (and should be) "What does this mean for George Hincapie."

IMO, Armstrong would have been better served if he were not portrayed in the hagiographic light that OLN bathed him in. His story is, in and of itself, compelling and admirable. It doesn't need glossing over. But, b/c of said coverage, Armstrong does come accross as something of an egotistical, petty, spoiled ass. The exact opposite of what he probably is truly like, but HOW WOULD I KNOW? He would have been better served if OLN was more balanced and professional in its reporting.
Great Post...well said and perfectly true

How do you know that World War II even happened? Were you there?

Did you ever make a trip to Arlington cemetery or get up and open your eyes on Memorial
day, come on.

There's an interesting article in Velo News on more than 5-time champions within the last year. The upshot of their point is all the 5-time champions have been since the 1960's, and with racing becoming more specialized and people focusing more on fewer races, Lance was probably the first of the more than five champions, not the last. They even went so far as to pick Basso as the next.

This doesn't really make any sense. If all the racers start focusing on fewer races, then most of the tour riders will have focused on that. That makes it a complete wash.

Chris

Djudd hit it spot on. OLN has it's collective nose so far up Lance's ass it had me wishing for a crash in the time trial or something just to shut them up. I can't wait to watch the TdF next year simply because there won't be the Lance crutch to lean on (meaning the putz that is Bob Roll will have nothing to talk about).

I was also incensed at the constant re-focus to Lance when discussing the individual achievements of the other riders. A stage win in the TdF is a career defining event for 95% of the cyclists out there, yet the victory gets trivialized because "it won't hurt Armstrong in the overall standings".

In spite of all this, I hope OLN keeps high cycling ratings simply because I want more coverage of the Giro next year to go along with the TdF fest. Giro was 50X more exciting anyway.

BTW - Madden does have his crushes if you think about it. Prior to his current infatuation with Favre, he was a total Cowboys fanboy. I think he tried rubbing his man-boobs all over Troy Aikman once or twice...

No, I don't know Lance Armstrong, and perhaps that is the problem. If I am to believe OLN's hagiography, Armstrong is, simultaneously, an all conquering cycling champion who heals lepers, feeds the poor and saves kittens out of trees. I don't "blame" Armstrong for the coverage/portrayal, I doubt he views himself that way, and I doubt even more he asked for it, but for three weeks that is what we were bombarded with from OLN. And that is not "normal" national sports coverage of a Superbowl level event - Al Michaels and John Madden don't constantly refer to players by their first name (a broadcasting 101 rule) or openly root for one team (another broadcasting 101 rule), yet are still intimately knowledgeable about the game and its players. I am failry certain that I stopped rooting for Armstrong when both Al Trautwig and Bob Roll started belittling Ullrich (particularly Roll's Hogan's Heroes-esque German accent, of Ullrich wanting more strudel or whatever). Ullrich actually has won the TdF, but we were told he was basically insane to think he could win it again, or even seriously compete, that no one really knew why he, or any of the other "pretenders" (i.e. Basso, Vinokourov, Leipheimer) even showed up to race the all conquering Armstrong. Or perhaps it was when Carmichel noted that Armstrong wears a Nike heart rate monitor during one of the Polar sponsored segments (what a great shill). Or, perhaps, it was the way the announcers would try to turn any conversation into an Armstrong topic (perhaps best illustrated when Trautwig, after Hincapie was on the podium after he had won a stage, asking Bob Roll (and I am paraphrasing here) "What does this mean to Lance Armstrong." One would think the question would be (and should be) "What does this mean for George Hincapie."

IMO, Armstrong would have been better served if he were not portrayed in the hagiographic light that OLN bathed him in. His story is, in and of itself, compelling and admirable. It doesn't need glossing over. But, b/c of said coverage, Armstrong does come accross as something of an egotistical, petty, spoiled ass. The exact opposite of what he probably is truly like, but HOW WOULD I KNOW? He would have been better served if OLN was more balanced and professional in its reporting.


IMHO it's pretty normal that an American TV station focuses on an American team and it's leader. The same is done by German TV and T-Mobile/Jan Ullrich.

It's arguable that he's a 100% class act in cycling, but in the business of life, he's no class act.

I know there are guys out here who are divorced and I'm sure they have their reasons, but a lot of people, looking from the outside in, don't view Armstrong as anything near a class act.

It's easy to be a class act when things are good, but his actions were almost like a mid life crisis.

Is nothing, married woman who stands by him. Becomes successful, has kids. Wife spends long stretches of time alone taking care of kids so he can do his thing. He becomes more successful. With that comes prestige, money and hanging out with a new crowd.

Wife of his youth now doesn't have that appeal. He doesn't respect her sacrifice to take care of his children while he's out doing his thing. Dumps her for celebrity. Gets rock star girlfriend, life is amazing.

Now, he says his kids are the most important thing. They weren't when he was riding, but now they are. He says he's doesn't need another tour, but he didn't quit when it could have saved his marriage (intact family for his kids). Now he says he's going to be a full time dad. But he's going to be on TV, travelling with his rock star girlfriend, etc. Is that a full time dad at all.

Armstrong is a great rider, but as a human being who respects his wife and her sacrifices, he's a sack of cr*p.

for want of a better word. I would have no complaints with an American or Anglo-(given Phil and Paul's views of the world)-centric view of the TdF b/c it is a broadcast for an American audience. "Focusing" on individuals in sporting competitions has a long history in American sports television - from "The human drama of athletic compeition" of Wide World of Sports to the "Upclose and Personal" segments on any channel's Olympic coverage. Whether it is good or bad television is a matter of taste. Hell, when Trautwig does the Ironman on NBC (and I am pretty sure it is Trautwig) half the show is devoted to background segments on the athletes and their "courage" in getting to/participating in such a grueling event. The difference between the TdF and the Ironman is that in the Ironman Trautwig takes that tack with ALL of the athletes, celebrating each of them, not just one as was the case in the TdF. If the TdF standards were used in the Ironman, only the favorite would be extolled and the rest would be portrayed as chumps. Hagiography, and I really do believe that is the right word for OLN's coverage/portrayal of Armstrong, is not "focus."

I agree with you that most American cycling fans who tune in the TdF, whether casual or ardent, would have greatly enjoyed indepth reporting/coverage (or "focus") on Leipheimer, Landis, Zabriskie (sp.?), Horner and the rest of the Americans in the TdF - I would have. And given how the stages usually played out god knows they had the time to fill. All we really got of another American cyclist was Hincapie as lacky to Armstrong (I know he is a domestique, but they still didn't have to dis him to build up Armstrong when Hincapie won the stage). I know they did have an upclose and personal segment on Robbie McEwan. I can only guess that they did so because 1) he is a sprinter and thus not a threat in anyway to Armstrong on GC (and since Armstrong isn't a sprinter it is only a sidelight), and 2) Liggett probably demanded it in his contract b/c he is such a big McEwan fan.

I was not arguing against focus. I was, and still am, railing against hagiography.