Armstrong Comparison With Mercyx

[thebooradley]

In the wake of his announced retirement all the tributes are flooding
in including comparisons to the great Eddy Mercyx.

I don't think that peaking for 3 weeks and 1 event a year even remotely
puts Lance in the same ballpark. I'm dissapointed in Lance having
suggested he would cement his legacy with some rides in the Classics
and other major races, to finally just fulfilling his Discovery Channel
obligations, and pandering to the American public who know nothing
other than the TDF. If he wins TDF number 7 this will further enhance
his already legendary status and give him more clout with his charity
work and whatever else he decides to do in life, but judging by his
current form an Indurain style fade out with his cycling career seems
more likely.

Now Laurent Jalabert was the closest we have had to Mercyx in the
recent era. The difference between those two was that Mercyx won
everything while Jalabert just tried to win everything. He went from
being a TDF green points jersey winning sprinter to Tour of Spain
winner, Classics winner, World Time Trial Champion, and two time TDF
King of the Mountains.

Yes Armstrong was (is ?) great, but if comparisons are to be made then
Armstrong could have been like Mercyx, but instead chose to be like
Indurain.

[Geraard Spergen]

"thebooradley" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> In the wake of his announced retirement all the tributes are flooding
> in including comparisons to the great Eddy Mercyx.
>
> I don't think that peaking for 3 weeks and 1 event a year even remotely
> puts Lance in the same ballpark. I'm dissapointed in Lance having
> suggested he would cement his legacy with some rides in the Classics
> and other major races, to finally just fulfilling his Discovery Channel
> obligations, and pandering to the American public who know nothing
> other than the TDF. If he wins TDF number 7 this will further enhance
> his already legendary status and give him more clout with his charity
> work and whatever else he decides to do in life, but judging by his
> current form an Indurain style fade out with his cycling career seems
> more likely.
>
> Now Laurent Jalabert was the closest we have had to Mercyx in the
> recent era. The difference between those two was that Mercyx won
> everything while Jalabert just tried to win everything. He went from
> being a TDF green points jersey winning sprinter to Tour of Spain
> winner, Classics winner, World Time Trial Champion, and two time TDF
> King of the Mountains.
>
> Yes Armstrong was (is ?) great, but if comparisons are to be made then
> Armstrong could have been like Mercyx, but instead chose to be like
> Indurain.
>

Who's Eddy Mercyx?

[Bestest Handsander]

"thebooradley" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Now Laurent Jalabert was the closest we have had to Mercyx in the
> recent era. The difference between those two was that Mercyx won
> everything while Jalabert just tried to win everything. He went from
> being a TDF green points jersey winning sprinter to Tour of Spain
> winner, Classics winner, World Time Trial Champion, and two time TDF
> King of the Mountains.

I would place Sean Kelly ahead of Jalabert. He won more throughout the
season. My lasting memory of him was in the world championship in '89 when
he realized LeMond was going to beat him in the sprint. Painful disbelief!

[psycholist]

"thebooradley" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> In the wake of his announced retirement all the tributes are flooding
> in including comparisons to the great Eddy Mercyx.
>
> I don't think that peaking for 3 weeks and 1 event a year even remotely
> puts Lance in the same ballpark. I'm dissapointed in Lance having
> suggested he would cement his legacy with some rides in the Classics
> and other major races, to finally just fulfilling his Discovery Channel
> obligations, and pandering to the American public who know nothing
> other than the TDF. If he wins TDF number 7 this will further enhance
> his already legendary status and give him more clout with his charity
> work and whatever else he decides to do in life, but judging by his
> current form an Indurain style fade out with his cycling career seems
> more likely.
>
> Now Laurent Jalabert was the closest we have had to Mercyx in the
> recent era. The difference between those two was that Mercyx won
> everything while Jalabert just tried to win everything. He went from
> being a TDF green points jersey winning sprinter to Tour of Spain
> winner, Classics winner, World Time Trial Champion, and two time TDF
> King of the Mountains.
>
> Yes Armstrong was (is ?) great, but if comparisons are to be made then
> Armstrong could have been like Mercyx, but instead chose to be like
> Indurain.

Really? Where are those? I haven't read any, and I've read lots of stuff.
I've seen plenty of stuff that says he's a great cyclist. Would you dispute
that? Actually, the first thing I've read comparing him to Merckx since his
announcement of retirement is your post. Why do you have to try to compare
them? Aren't you intelligent enough to realize that they raced in different
times, for different teams, from different countries, for different sponsors
with different agendas? And why do you sell short Lance's Classics record?
Actually, there are very few cyclists who can match it. And throw in a
world championship and a semi-Classic victory, to boot.

Try not to be so small-minded.
--
Bob C.

"Of course it hurts. The trick is not minding that it hurts."
T. E. Lawrence (of Arabia)

[Mark & Steven Bornfeld]

Geraard Spergen wrote:

> "thebooradley" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>>In the wake of his announced retirement all the tributes are flooding
>>in including comparisons to the great Eddy Mercyx.
>>
>>I don't think that peaking for 3 weeks and 1 event a year even remotely
>>puts Lance in the same ballpark. I'm dissapointed in Lance having
>>suggested he would cement his legacy with some rides in the Classics
>>and other major races, to finally just fulfilling his Discovery Channel
>>obligations, and pandering to the American public who know nothing
>>other than the TDF. If he wins TDF number 7 this will further enhance
>>his already legendary status and give him more clout with his charity
>>work and whatever else he decides to do in life, but judging by his
>>current form an Indurain style fade out with his cycling career seems
>>more likely.
>>
>>Now Laurent Jalabert was the closest we have had to Mercyx in the
>>recent era. The difference between those two was that Mercyx won
>>everything while Jalabert just tried to win everything. He went from
>>being a TDF green points jersey winning sprinter to Tour of Spain
>>winner, Classics winner, World Time Trial Champion, and two time TDF
>>King of the Mountains.
>>
>>Yes Armstrong was (is ?) great, but if comparisons are to be made then
>>Armstrong could have been like Mercyx, but instead chose to be like
>>Indurain.
>>
>
>
> Who's Eddy Mercyx?
>
>

If I named my tailbone, it would be Eddy Coccyx.

Steve

--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001

[Diablo Scott]

psycholist wrote:
>
> Try not to be so small-minded.


Seems to me there are a lot more people complaining about people making
the comparisons, than there are people actually making the comparisons.

THEBOORADLEY (the OP) seems to be both.

[psycholist]

"Diablo Scott" > wrote in message
news:1114033572.138beea71e64f62893b959e873defcf9@t eranews...
> psycholist wrote:
>>
>> Try not to be so small-minded.
>
>
> Seems to me there are a lot more people complaining about people making
> the comparisons, than there are people actually making the comparisons.


Good!

--
Bob C.

"Of course it hurts. The trick is not minding that it hurts."
T. E. Lawrence (of Arabia)

[MyFirstname MyLastName]

Mark & Steven Bornfeld > writes:

> > Who's Eddy Mercyx?
> >
>
> If I named my tailbone, it would be Eddy Coccyx.
>

He's related to the Merck family.

You know who I mean. The pharmaceutical outfit that produced all that
highly traceable and non-effective rEPO

--
Regards,
Ila Kutcherkokoff
(Lorena's Cousin)

[Mark & Steven Bornfeld]

MyFirstname MyLastName wrote:

> Mark & Steven Bornfeld > writes:
>
>
>>>Who's Eddy Mercyx?
>>>
>>
>> If I named my tailbone, it would be Eddy Coccyx.
>>
>
>
> He's related to the Merck family.
>
> You know who I mean. The pharmaceutical outfit that produced all that
> highly traceable and non-effective rEPO
>

I thought that was Amgenckx.

Steve

--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001

[MyFirstname MyLastName]

Mark & Steven Bornfeld > writes:

> I thought that was Amgenckx.
>

Ah yes, the rDNA outfit
--
Regards,
Ila Kutcherkokoff
(Lorena's Cousin)

[[email protected]]

Steven Bornfeld wrote:

<If I named my tailbone, it would be Eddy Coccyx.>

Just as long as you resist the temptation to name a son Orel-- or Hiram
Gene or similar (<g>). --TP

[Donald Munro]

Geraard Spergen wrote:
>> Who's Eddy Mercyx?

Mark & Steven Bornfeld wrote:
> If I named my tailbone, it would be Eddy Coccyx.

Naming parts of your anatomy is considered gay by rbr conventions.

[thebooradley]

I have read a couple of those comparisons including one by Chris
Boardman. The point I was trying to make was that comparisons are
unnecessary and nobody can compare to Merckx (correct spelling this
time) anyway.

Lance has a decent Classics record but nothing spectacular, and I was
expressing my disappointment that he would not be trying to improve on
that. I would much rather have seen him winning races like
Liege-Bastonge-Liege, Tour of Flanders or even Parix-Roubaix than
another TDF.

One other thing that springs to mind is the hour record. I don't know
if he was ever seriously considering it but does his retirement rule
this out completely now?

[thebooradley]

Good point. I had forgot about Sean Kelly who was slightly before my
time as a pro cycling fan. His classics record was far superior, but I
don't think he was quite the all rounder that Jalabert turned out to be.

[psycholist]

"thebooradley" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Lance has a decent Classics record but nothing spectacular, and I was
> expressing my disappointment that he would not be trying to improve on
> that. I would much rather have seen him winning races like
> Liege-Bastonge-Liege, Tour of Flanders or even Parix-Roubaix than
> another TDF.
>
> One other thing that springs to mind is the hour record. I don't know
> if he was ever seriously considering it but does his retirement rule
> this out completely now?

Yep. I agree with you completely on that. I thought he looked so strong
and had so much fun on the stage 4 (IIRC) cobbles at last year's tour that
he might really give the cobbled classics some serious consideration. I'd
have loved to see him give Flanders a real go for himself ... and to have
seen him finally take Amstel. And yes, the hour record thing would have
been nice, too. But on that point, I kinda see that as too little to gain
and too much to lose. How much would the hour record build on his
reputation vs. how much would it be diminished if he tried and failed?

--
Bob C.

"Of course it hurts. The trick is not minding that it hurts."
T. E. Lawrence (of Arabia)

[Kenny]

thebooradley wrote:
> Good point. I had forgot about Sean Kelly who was slightly before my
> time as a pro cycling fan. His classics record was far superior, but
I
> don't think he was quite the all rounder that Jalabert turned out to
be.

Check this out and change your opinion; Jalabert doesn't come even
close to Kelly

Amstel Gold Race
1980 3rd
Clasica San Sebastian
1990 3rd
Driedaagse van De Panne - Koksijde
1980 1st
1985 2nd
1986 2nd
1987 2nd
E3-prijs Harelbeke
1980 2nd
Gent-Wevelgem
1988 1st
GP des Nations
1984 2nd
1986 1st
Criterium Internationale
1983 1st
1984 1st
1985 3rd
1986 2nd
1987 1st
Liege-Bastogne-Liege
1984 1st
1989 1st
Milano-Sanremo
1984 2nd
1986 1st
1992 1st
Omloop Het Volk
1980 3rd
1982 3rd
1989 2nd
Paris-Bruxelles
1986 2nd
Paris-Nice
1982 1st
1983 1st
1984 1st
1985 1st
1986 1st
1987 1st
1988 1st
Paris-Roubaix
1984 1st
1985 3rd
1986 1st
Paris-Tours
1984 1st
1985 3rd
1988 3rd
Vuelta a Catalunya
1984 1st
1985 2nd
1986 1st
Tour de France
1984 5th
1985 4th
Vuelta al Pais Vasco
1984 1st
1986 1st
1987 1st
Giro di Lombardia
1983 1st
1985 1st
1986 2nd
1991 1st
Piemonte
1983 2nd
Vuelta a Espana
1980 4th
1986 3rd
1988 1st
Ronde van Vlaanderen
1984 2nd
1986 2nd
1987 2nd
Tour de Suisse
1983 1st
1990 1st
Rund Um Den Henninger Turm Frankfurt
1982 3rd
1984 3rd
Tour de France Points Jersey
1980 2nd
1982 1st
1983 1st
1984 2nd
1985 1st
1988 3rd
1989 1st
4jours de Dunkuerque
1981 2nd
Worlds
1982 3rd
1986 5th
1987 5th
1989 3rd
1990 5th

[thebooradley]

If it is about who had the better results then Sean Kelly wins without
a shadow of a doubt, but I still think Jalabert had the better all
round record by being a slightly better time trialist and also with his
King of the Mountains victories.

As far as all round results in the different disciplines go I can't
think of anyone since Merckx with such a broad ranging palmares, and I
believe he was unique in his era.

[thebooradley]

I think Lance would break the hour record with adequate preparation. I
don't think Boardman was in his best form when he set the athletes hour
record and i'm surprised it has lasted this long. It is Boardman's
other hour record on the aero bike which even Armstrong in peak form
would struggle to beat, but that one is now defunct.

I think it comes down to marketability. A 7th TDF would carry more
weight with the American public than any classics or hour records which
most of them will never have heard of.

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On 21 Apr 2005 09:54:03 -0700, "thebooradley"
> wrote:

>If it is about who had the better results then Sean Kelly wins without
>a shadow of a doubt, but I still think Jalabert had the better all
>round record by being a slightly better time trialist

That's debateble.

> and also with his
>King of the Mountains victories.

Both these guys were so good that those don't count for much other
than late-career popularity for Jalabert.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

[MR_CREEPY]

Joop Zoetemelk is clearly the 2nd best rider ever.

[Kenny]

thebooradley wrote:
> If it is about who had the better results then Sean Kelly wins
without
> a shadow of a doubt, but I still think Jalabert had the better all
> round record by being a slightly better time trialist and also with
his
> King of the Mountains victories.

Kelly won the GP des nations once end also ended 2nd. That's a ITT of
70km. It was the unofficial WC time trialing in some way; knowing that
all the greats of history won it. (Anquetil 9 times!)

The king of mountains jersey means nothing. Or better: it doesn't
necessarily mean you're the best climber. LA never won it, Pantani
never won it, but Botero and Rinero did. Even Mario Aerts got 2nd, can
you believe that? If you look at their finishes in Grand Tours and HC
stage races, wich is the best way to compare climb and TT abilities,
they're quite equal. They had the same limits but Kelly just won a lot
more of the races that suited him: both 1 Vuelta; 6HC for Jaja to 14 HC
for Kelly

JAJA:
Paris-Nice
1991 2nd
1995 1st
1996 1st
1997 1st
1998 2nd
2002 3rd
Vuelta a Catalunya
1995 1st
Tour de France
1995 4th
Pais Vasco
1995 2nd
1997 2nd
1998 2nd
1999 1st
2000 3rd
Giro d'Italia
1999 4th
Tourd de Romandie
1999 1st
Vuelta a Espana
1995 1st
1998 5th
Tour de Suisse
1999 2nd

KELLY:
Paris-Nice
1982 1st
1983 1st
1984 1st
1985 1st
1986 1st
1987 1st
1988 1st
Catalunya
1984 1st
1985 2nd
1986 1st
Tour de France
1984 5th
1985 4th
Pais Vasco
1984 1st
1986 1st
1987 1st
Vuelta a Espana
1980 4th
1986 3rd
1988 1st
Tour de Suisse
1983 1st
1990 1st


Kenny

[Dan Gregory]

MR_CREEPY wrote:
> Joop Zoetemelk is clearly the 2nd best rider ever.
Mais non c'est Poupou!
All the best
Dan Gregory

[Jack Hollis]

On 20 Apr 2005 11:16:48 -0700, "thebooradley"
> wrote:

>Yes Armstrong was (is ?) great, but if comparisons are to be made then
>Armstrong could have been like Mercyx, but instead chose to be like
>Indurain.

Of course, if Eddie Merckx were riding today, even he couldn't do what
Eddie Merckx did.

[Stewart Fleming]

Jack Hollis wrote:
> On 20 Apr 2005 11:16:48 -0700, "thebooradley"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>Yes Armstrong was (is ?) great, but if comparisons are to be made then
>>Armstrong could have been like Mercyx, but instead chose to be like
>>Indurain.
>
>
> Of course, if Eddie Merckx were riding today, even he couldn't do what
> Eddie Merckx did.

Could he have done what Eddy Merckx did?

[Jay S. Hill]

>> Of course, if Eddie Merckx were riding today, even he couldn't do what
>> Eddie Merckx did.
>
> Could he have done what Eddy Merckx did?

C'mon, he got the last name right, and that's the hard one.

[Jack Hollis]

On Wed, 04 May 2005 22:23:01 GMT, "Jay S. Hill" >
wrote:

>>> Of course, if Eddie Merckx were riding today, even he couldn't do what
>>> Eddie Merckx did.
>>
>> Could he have done what Eddy Merckx did?
>
>C'mon, he got the last name right, and that's the hard one.

You see it both ways.

In any case Ed, Edd, Eddie or Eddy Merckx could never accomplish what
he did if he was riding today.

[alex]

Definitely Lance could not have accomplished what he has with Eddie or
anybody 70% his caliber around.

"Jack Hollis" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 04 May 2005 22:23:01 GMT, "Jay S. Hill" >
> wrote:
>
>>>> Of course, if Eddie Merckx were riding today, even he couldn't do what
>>>> Eddie Merckx did.
>>>
>>> Could he have done what Eddy Merckx did?
>>
>>C'mon, he got the last name right, and that's the hard one.
>
> You see it both ways.
>
> In any case Ed, Edd, Eddie or Eddy Merckx could never accomplish what
> he did if he was riding today.

[Andre]

Why does anyone mention Merckx in the same paragraph with Armstrong?
Merckx won:
Championnat du Monde- 3 times
Championnat de Belgique - i time
Milan-S.R. - 7 times
Tour de Flandres- 2 times
Paris-Roubaix- 3 times
Liege-Bastogne-Liege- 5 times
Gold Race - 2 times
Tour de Lombardie - 2 times
Circuit Het Volk - 2 times
Gand-Wevelgem - 3 times
Fleche Wallone - 3 times
Paris-Bruxelles- 1 time
G.P. de L'Escaut- 1 time
Henninget Turm - 1 time
Tour de France - 5 times
Tour d'Italie - 5 times
Tour de Suisse- 1 time
Tour d'Espagne- 1 time
Tour de Belgique - 2 times
Criterium du Dauphine - 1 time
G.P. du Fourmies - 1 time
G.P. du Midi Libre - 1 time
Paris-Nice - 3 times
Tour de Morbihan - 1 time
Tour Mediterraneen - 1 time
Semaine Catalane - 2 times
Tour de Catalogne - 1 time
Tour du Levant - 1 time
Tour de Sardaigne - 4 times
Tour de Romandie - 1 time
Paris-Luxembourg - 1 time
Championnat de Flandres - 1 time
Circuit de la vallee de la Lys- 1 time
Fleche Brabanconne - 1 time
G.P. Cerami- Wasmuel- 1 time
Prix de Cloture-Putte Kapellen- 1 time
G.P. Union Dortmund - 2 times
Copa Agostini - 1 time
Trofeo Laigueglia - 2 times
G.P. des Nations - 1 time
G.P. Lugano - 1 time
Trophee Baracchi - 3 times
Montjuich - 6 times
A travers Lausanne - 4 times
Criterium des As - 3 times
Chateaulin - 3 times

And those are only the principal victories; he won over 300 races.


Andre

[Tom Kunich]

"Andre" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Why does anyone mention Merckx in the same paragraph with Armstrong?

Because they're idiots without the brains to look anything up.

Armstrong is without a doubt one of the great racers of history but NO ONE
is in the same catagory as Eddy.

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article >,
"alex" > wrote:


> "Jack Hollis" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Wed, 04 May 2005 22:23:01 GMT, "Jay S. Hill" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >>>> Of course, if Eddie Merckx were riding today, even he couldn't do what
> >>>> Eddie Merckx did.
> >>>
> >>> Could he have done what Eddy Merckx did?

> Definitely Lance could not have accomplished what he has with Eddie or
> anybody 70% his caliber around.

That's just not fair. If you have some particular reason for believing
that Jan Ullrich sucks and isn't a worthy opponent, I'd like to hear it.

It's possible what you say is true, but it's also possible that Merckx
looked as good as he did because the other great racers of his
generation were poor competition. I think it's fair to say that unless
you have some other useful data point to contribute (paging Dr.
Chung...), the presumption is that both riders faced competitors of
reasonably similar relative ability*

*Not that it's easily comparable. After all, general training and
performance has risen so much that Merckx' hour record has been beaten
by riders who nobody holds in as much esteem as Eddy himself. What might
be useful is to see, for example, hour efforts or some other standard
performance by Lance, Eddy, and their competition, to get an idea of
what the relative level of each great rider was versus their main
opponents.

Of course, then we'll all argue over which performance test is the best
measure, etc. etc....

--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.wiredcola.com
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.

[alex]

"Ryan Cousineau" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "alex" > wrote:
>
>
>> "Jack Hollis" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > On Wed, 04 May 2005 22:23:01 GMT, "Jay S. Hill" >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>>> Of course, if Eddie Merckx were riding today, even he couldn't do
>> >>>> what
>> >>>> Eddie Merckx did.
>> >>>
>> >>> Could he have done what Eddy Merckx did?
>
>> Definitely Lance could not have accomplished what he has with Eddie or
>> anybody 70% his caliber around.
>
> That's just not fair. If you have some particular reason for believing
> that Jan Ullrich sucks and isn't a worthy opponent, I'd like to hear it.
>

No. You have said that! I am saying 70% of Eddie is better than 100% of
Lance - or Ullrich for that matter.

In fact, if you put together Lance's and Jan's palmares you do not even get
near 30% of Eddie's. Even if you consider the Grand tour level the ratio
would still be lower that 70%. And here we are taking about two to guys that
pretty much devote 100% of their time and their organizations to one race.

If Eddie had limited himself to the TdF and few other races he could have
won that particular race more times that Jan and Lance together . I think
there is no much question about that.

Alex.

[Jack Hollis]

On Wed, 04 May 2005 20:10:48 -0700, Ryan Cousineau >
wrote:

>> Definitely Lance could not have accomplished what he has with Eddie or
>> anybody 70% his caliber around.
>
>That's just not fair. If you have some particular reason for believing
>that Jan Ullrich sucks and isn't a worthy opponent, I'd like to hear it.


Absolutly, if Lance wasn't around, Ullrich would have won the TdF
numerous times and everyone would be comparing him to Merckx.

Besides, Merckx used drugs, which taints all his accomplishments.

[[email protected]]

There is some similarities but Lance chose to be a tdf specialist.
Hinault's career is closet to Merckx.

In many respects I can understand Lance's decision to contest fewer
race's. The peleton has become a lot more competitive over years. It's
inexplicable however as to why Lance has chose to foregoe the fall
season. Despite Lemond's many shortcomings at least he raced throughout
the season.

Lance could have been a much greater rider if he decided to win the
Giro or the Vuelta and more of the classic's.

[Curtis L. Russell]

On 5 May 2005 13:21:28 -0700, wrote:

>
>Lance could have been a much greater rider if he decided to win the
>Giro or the Vuelta and more of the classic's.

Even if LA had raced the spring classics and come back after a three
week vacation after the Tour to race the rest of the season, he would
not have won as many or done as well as Merckx. Training cycles across
the board are more deliberate than 30 years ago, and the competition
would have been accordingly difficult to dominate.

Turn it 90 degrees. Would he have made more money by winning more of
those races? Doubt it. His salary is based on the Tour and a
marketability that comes from Tour wins and his back story of
recovering from cancer and associated activities.

So he won't match Merckx for number one and he won't make any more
money, in any real sense. OTOH, he can take time off and pace himself
to get off the bike with a bunch of money and still in good shape at a
decent age to start a new career. Somehow I don't think he is going to
spend much time worrying about his place in the cycling firmanent two
days after the Tour ends, or what he could have done.

Now I personally don't care that he didn't race the classics that
much, and even less did he race to win. There was plenty of talent on
the road in most major events over the last ten years, even the Giro,
to enjoy almost every race. The boring ones probably would have been
little served by Lance in the peloton.

And BTW could we all decide whether or not Lance is an ass for not
letting more people win or is he is a piker for not racing more races
to win? I'm no Lance fan, but I enjoy his racing smarts one race at a
time, and it seems pretty much OK if he skips some races and leaves
them for the one day specialists, races some for training and when he
enters a race to win, he is allowed to race to win. Why all the
trauma?

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

[alex]

"Jack Hollis" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 04 May 2005 20:10:48 -0700, Ryan Cousineau >
> wrote:
>
>>> Definitely Lance could not have accomplished what he has with Eddie or
>>> anybody 70% his caliber around.
>>
>>That's just not fair. If you have some particular reason for believing
>>that Jan Ullrich sucks and isn't a worthy opponent, I'd like to hear it.
>
>
> Absolutly, if Lance wasn't around, Ullrich would have won the TdF
> numerous times and everyone would be comparing him to Merckx.
>

Not in this newsgroup, as 80% of the people would not even be showing up had
Lance not won anything ;)

Even then, the comparison would have been even more of a joke. We could be
using Beloki as a paradigm of tough competition during Jan's years; because,
once that you remove your blinkers (and the "great rivalry" marketing), you
can see that Beloki has been closer to Jan than Jan to Lance...


2000 1. Lance Armstrong (USA) 92.33.08 39.56 21 3,662 180
128
2. Jan Ullrich (Ger) 6.02
3. Joseba Beloki (Spa) 10.04

2001 1. Lance Armstrong (USA) 86.17.28 40.02 20 3,453 189
144
2. Jan Ullrich (Ger) 6.44
3. Joseba Beloki (Spa) 9.05

2002 1. Lance Armstrong (USA) 82.05.12 39.93 20 3,278 189
153
2. Joseba Beloki (Spa) 7.17
3. Raimondas Rumsas (Ltu) 8.17

--------->>>>>
2003 1. Lance Armstrong (USA) 83.41.12 40.94 20 3,427 189
147
2. Jan Ullrich (Ger) 1.01
3. Alexandre Vinokourov (Kaz) 4.14

And consider that in 2003 Beloki fell when he was whipping Jan's butt.

Adter stage 8:

1 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal-Berry Floor 35.12.50
2 Joseba Beloki (Spa) ONCE-Eroski 0.40
3 Iban Mayo (Spa) Euskaltel-Euskadi 1.10
4 Alexandre Vinokourov (Kaz) Team Telekom 1.17
5 Francisco Mancebo (Spa) iBanesto.com 1.37
6 Tyler Hamilton (USA) Team CSC 1.52
7 Roberto Heras (Spa) US Postal-Berry Floor 1.58
8 Jan Ullrich(Ger) Team Bianchi 2.10

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article >,
"alex" > wrote:

> "Ryan Cousineau" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > "alex" > wrote:
> >
> >
> >> "Jack Hollis" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > On Wed, 04 May 2005 22:23:01 GMT, "Jay S. Hill" >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>>> Of course, if Eddie Merckx were riding today, even he couldn't do
> >> >>>> what
> >> >>>> Eddie Merckx did.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Could he have done what Eddy Merckx did?
> >
> >> Definitely Lance could not have accomplished what he has with Eddie or
> >> anybody 70% his caliber around.
> >
> > That's just not fair. If you have some particular reason for believing
> > that Jan Ullrich sucks and isn't a worthy opponent, I'd like to hear it.
> >
>
> No. You have said that! I am saying 70% of Eddie is better than 100% of
> Lance - or Ullrich for that matter.
>
> In fact, if you put together Lance's and Jan's palmares you do not even get
> near 30% of Eddie's. Even if you consider the Grand tour level the ratio
> would still be lower that 70%. And here we are taking about two to guys that
> pretty much devote 100% of their time and their organizations to one race.

That's fair enough. It must be said that Eddy rode in an era of much
less specialization: almost all of his contemporaries would have ridden
a full racing season, just like Eddy. Nowadays, very few riders compete
in any meaningful way throughout the season. Top riders focus on the
Spring classics, a particular GT, or the Worlds.

Lance, and every other rider, have adapted to this world by becoming
very good at one race.

> If Eddie had limited himself to the TdF and few other races he could have
> won that particular race more times that Jan and Lance together . I think
> there is no much question about that.

It's hard to say for sure: Eddy certainly had another Tour victory in
him, and maybe he could have stretched a few more years out of his
career if he rode less. But he was also unfortunate enough to have badly
hurt his back in the infamous derny crash, and that may have been the
limit to his career.

No matter: if Lance wins this year, decides he likes riding more than he
likes his kids and comes out of retirement to win two more tours after
that, he still couldn't touch Eddy's astonishing records. Merckx won in
every discipline from tours to six-day races. Merckx won something like
a third of all the races he entered, which is just scary.

Lance, it must be said, has achieved exactly what he wanted to:
unprecedented dominance of the most important bike race in the world. It
speaks to his power that when we look for people to compare him to, we
do not bother with contemporaries like Simoni, Cunego, Backstedt,
Petacchi, et al. Worthy riders, all, but for riders we can really see as
outmatching Armstrong, we have to look into history, and we have to look
at Merckx.

Maybe there are a few other riders with similar levels of dominance in
their respective fields (Beryl Burton, the English female TTist, comes
to mind), but I think only Merckx has a demonstrably superior record.

--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.wiredcola.com
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.

[Kyle Legate]

wrote:
>
> Lance could have been a much greater rider if he decided to win the
> Giro or the Vuelta and more of the classic's.
>
You don't just "decide" to win a race. If that were the case, I'd be
more successfulo than LANCE.

[Donald Munro]

Jack Hollis wrote:
> Besides, Merckx used drugs, which taints all his accomplishments.

Dumbass,

Stimulants hardly count; the only drugs that really increases performance
markedly are those that raise haemocrit levels.

Apart from which there is a reasonably good probability that Armstrong is
increasing his haemocrit levels, though not necessarily by chemical means.
Even if he is (was ?), it would not "taint all his accomplishments" in my
eyes.

[Bob Schwartz]

thebooradley > wrote:
> Yes Armstrong was (is ?) great, but if comparisons are to be made then
> Armstrong could have been like Mercyx, but instead chose to be like
> Indurain.

Others have made this point before, but what the hell. Repetition is
the very soul of usenet.

Merckx was a World Champion is the way that World Series winners are
World Champions. It was a different time, and the sport was almost
entirely limited to only a few nations.

For example, consider the field in the 1967 World Championships,
Merckx' first.

70 riders from 11 countries. The countries represented were (West)
Germany, Belgium, Spain, France, Italy, Switzerland, the Netherlands,
and Great Britain. Three riders from Oz, two from Luxembourg, and
the Dane Ole Ritter filled out the field. So really, you only had
a few countries that sent teams filled top to bottom with quality
riders.

Contrast that with the 2004 field in Verona.

200 entrants from 38 countries. 14 eastern European squads including
substantial teams from Russia and the Ukraine. A full and dangerous
team from OZ. All North American countries represented and three
South American (Argentina, Brazil, and Colombia). All Scandinavian
countries represented. Asian, yes that's right, Asian riders in the
field.

Merckx won more but against a much shallower field. I think we lose
sight of just how unusual it was when ACBB started sending English
speaking riders into the pro ranks.

Bob Schwartz

[gds]

I think that all of these inter generational comparisons are fun to
talk about but essentially futile..

Not only has the sport changed in terms of the countries participating
but also in terms of the quality of athlete competing as a result of
the $$$ involved. This is true in cycling and many other sports. The
attraction of a 7 figure earning potential is high and so I would
suggest that it attracts far more "genetically excellent" athletes than
in the days when riding and driving a cab had the same earnings
potential.

[Sandy]

Dans le message de ,
Bob Schwartz > a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> I think we lose
> sight of just how unusual it was when ACBB started sending English
> speaking riders into the pro ranks.
>
Sorry, I think I must be ignorant of your "ACBB", as the one I know is
Athletic Club de Boulogne-Billancourt (pretty well known here, I should
add). Could you explain, please ? That club has plenty of members who do
speak English (in a way).
--
Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

*******

La vie, c'est comme une bicyclette,
il faut avancer pour ne pas perdre l'équilibre.
-- Einstein, A.

[Jack Hollis]

On Fri, 06 May 2005 10:40:56 +0200, Donald Munro
> wrote:

>Jack Hollis wrote:
>> Besides, Merckx used drugs, which taints all his accomplishments.
>
>Dumbass,
>
>Stimulants hardly count; the only drugs that really increases performance
>markedly are those that raise haemocrit levels.

What world do you live in? Stimulants don't increase athletic
performance?

[Bob Schwartz]

Sandy > wrote:
> Dans le message de ,
> Bob Schwartz > a r?fl?chi, et puis a d?clar? :
>> I think we lose
>> sight of just how unusual it was when ACBB started sending English
>> speaking riders into the pro ranks.
>>
> Sorry, I think I must be ignorant of your "ACBB", as the one I know is
> Athletic Club de Boulogne-Billancourt (pretty well known here, I should
> add). Could you explain, please ? That club has plenty of members who do
> speak English (in a way).
> --
> Sandy
> Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

That was the route that many Aussie, Brit, and Irish riders took
to the pro ranks back in the day. The day being late 70s-early 80s.
Examples include most of the English speaking Peugeot riders of
that era. Anderson, Roche, Millar, Peiper... many more.

http://acbbcyclisme.free.fr/Acbb/historique/Historique.htm

Bob Schwartz

[Stewart Fleming]

Sandy wrote:
> Dans le message de ,
> Bob Schwartz > a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>
>> I think we lose
>> sight of just how unusual it was when ACBB started sending English
>> speaking riders into the pro ranks.
>>
> Sorry, I think I must be ignorant of your "ACBB", as the one I know is
> Athletic Club de Boulogne-Billancourt (pretty well known here, I should
> add). Could you explain, please ? That club has plenty of members who
> do speak English (in a way).

ACBB was one of the routes into professional cycling on the continent
for many British riders e.g Robert Millar as well as other foreigners
like Phil Anderson. Look up _Foreign Legion_ by Aussie journo Rupert
Guinness.

[[email protected]]

Well for most riders that's true, but a rider a rider of his caliber
it's not all that inconcievable. After all Lance did set a goal of
winning the tdf each year and he won. But when when considers in
totality Lance's ability it's clear he could have won more races if
chose to do so. Part of the problem is that Lance was so overly
cautious.