"Wired To Win" sucks

But it's IMAX, it's bike racing, it's the Tour de France, and it's 2003.
So go see it anyway.

With all that going for it, it almost seems like the filmmakers
struggled to make the most boring film possible. As most of us know, it
was scripted and filmed to feature Tyler Hamilton, who crashed at the
end of stage one, broke his collarbone, continued the race, even
impressively won a stage, and finished fourth overall. After Tyler got
dumped for (alleged) doping in 2004, they hacked and slashed the footage
to effectively cut him out. We see a couple shots clearly featuring
Tyler, but never hear his name. He's listed in the "featured riders"
credits.

Instead, we get... Jimmy Caspar and Baden Cooke. Woo-hoo! Okay, Caspar
earned a role, having sprained his neck in the same crash and continuing
into the Alps while wearing a neck brace. Cooke wrestled the green
jersey from Robbie McEwen, so it was worth covering him as well.

But these guys are sprinters who normally show up only in the last
minute of the flat stages. Clearly, the big IMAX camera wasn't pointed
at them for very long. We see Caspar on his bike for about 15 seconds
once the road goes uphill. Francais de Jeux riders (apparently) did some
post-race filming to help complete the footage and provide back story.

All the jaw-dropping drama of that year's TdF is depicted in OLN
footage. LANCE is mentioned prominently but mainly as the amazing guy
who owned the Tour. We see him on Luz Ardiden, but Beloki's crash and
Armstrong's cyclo-cross escapade on the road to Gap is given a complete
miss.

There's too much computer animation and not enough really cool IMAX race
coverage. Ample amounts of the former to tell the film's intended story
of how the brain of a human under stress works, too little of the latter
depicting the truly impressive speeds the pros ride at. What there is of
that IS cool, and I wonder how much of the non-cycling audience
understands the insane power required to go as fast as the pros do on
the flat or uphill.

I think the producers should've just said "go to hell" to WADA (World
Anti-Doping Agency), and ran with the original Tyler-centered story.
They could've used their original footage and Tyler's gut-check
performance in that race fed right into the film's original plot. They
could've held on a long prominent disclaimer at the end of the film
spilling the beans on Tyler's doping problems.

--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the
trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view,
the most insidious of traitors."
George H.W. Bush, April 16, 1999,

"Raptor" wrote in message
...


After Tyler got dumped for (alleged) doping in 2004, they hacked and slashed
the footage
to effectively cut him out.

You can remove (alleged) from the sentence.

"Frank Drackman" wrote in message
...

"Raptor" wrote in message
...


After Tyler got dumped for (alleged) doping in 2004, they hacked and
slashed the footage
to effectively cut him out.

You can remove (alleged) from the sentence.

Has Tyler admitted he doped? I confess that I haven't followed his
story in any great detail but, like a lot of other people, he seemed to
me like the very last person one would expect to be taking
performance-enhancing drugs.

-S-

Steve Freides wrote:
You can remove (alleged) from the sentence.

Has Tyler admitted he doped?

No... but he clearly had some elses blood in his body.

"Ron Ruff" wrote in message
oups.com...

Steve Freides wrote:
You can remove (alleged) from the sentence.

Has Tyler admitted he doped?

No... but he clearly had some elses blood in his body.

That's a shame - he seemed like such a nice guy.

-S-

Ron Ruff wrote:
Steve Freides wrote:
You can remove (alleged) from the sentence.
Has Tyler admitted he doped?

No... but he clearly had some elses blood in his body.

I don't know how clear it is. The test is new and still being vetted.
There was doubt about the charges, but it's a matter of hotly debated
opinion as to whether it was reasonable doubt.

--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the
trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view,
the most insidious of traitors."
George H.W. Bush, April 16, 1999,

Raptor wrote:
Ron Ruff wrote:
Steve Freides wrote:
You can remove (alleged) from the sentence.
Has Tyler admitted he doped?

No... but he clearly had some elses blood in his body.

I don't know how clear it is. The test is new and still being vetted.
There was doubt about the charges, but it's a matter of hotly debated
opinion as to whether it was reasonable doubt.


The question of whether the earth is spherical is hotly debated among
some people:
http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djubl...rthsociety.htm

The fact that people are willing to debate a subject ("hotly" or not)
does not indicate that reasonable people consider the subject to be in
doubt.

"Steve Freides" wrote in news:4e17jtF1cjg28U1
@individual.net:

"Ron Ruff" wrote in message
oups.com...

Steve Freides wrote:
You can remove (alleged) from the sentence.

Has Tyler admitted he doped?

No... but he clearly had some elses blood in his body.

That's a shame - he seemed like such a nice guy.

-S-




Why would he suddenly not be a nice guy anymore?

In article ,
"Jonathan v.d. Sluis" wrote:

"Steve Freides" wrote in news:4e17jtF1cjg28U1
@individual.net:

"Ron Ruff" wrote in message
oups.com...

Steve Freides wrote:
You can remove (alleged) from the sentence.

Has Tyler admitted he doped?

No... but he clearly had some elses blood in his body.

That's a shame - he seemed like such a nice guy.

-S-




Why would he suddenly not be a nice guy anymore?

One can, after a fashion, accept that maybe a "nice guy" would cheat at
bike racing, if for no other reason than being driven to do so by a
belief that everyone else was cheating, and therefore there was only one
way to the front of the pack, or because he sincerely believed the
anti-doping rules were wrong and was a conscientious objector.

But a nice guy wouldn't then swear on his dead dog's grave that he
hadn't done the deed.

So, IF Tyler Hamilton did the doping he's accused of, then he would fall
outside of most people's definition of a nice guy.

You can tell the nice guys by where they finish,

--
Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

"Ryan Cousineau" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Jonathan v.d. Sluis" wrote:

"Steve Freides" wrote in
news:4e17jtF1cjg28U1
@individual.net:

"Ron Ruff" wrote in message
oups.com...

Steve Freides wrote:
You can remove (alleged) from the sentence.

Has Tyler admitted he doped?

No... but he clearly had some elses blood in his body.

That's a shame - he seemed like such a nice guy.

-S-




Why would he suddenly not be a nice guy anymore?

One can, after a fashion, accept that maybe a "nice guy" would cheat
at
bike racing, if for no other reason than being driven to do so by a
belief that everyone else was cheating, and therefore there was only
one
way to the front of the pack, or because he sincerely believed the
anti-doping rules were wrong and was a conscientious objector.

But a nice guy wouldn't then swear on his dead dog's grave that he
hadn't done the deed.

So, IF Tyler Hamilton did the doping he's accused of, then he would
fall
outside of most people's definition of a nice guy.

You can tell the nice guys by where they finish,

What I meant by "nice guy" is, among other things, someone who would
never consider cheating, be it drugs or something else. He comes across
as someone who would never do this.

Now I know the world is full of good liars, so this is all completely
subjective on my part. Given what I've heard to date, I don't believe
he did the deed of which he's accused.

-S-