Better than ever.

dennisn

After reading all the posts about Lances comeback(or should I say trying to read) I am going to make a prediction. This coming year will be the best one yet in Pro cycling.
It's just got to be. The hype has just started and already, it's all anyone wants to talk about. All his supporters will be watching. Bunches of new people will climb on board, if only to see what all the shouting is about. And of course his detractors wouldn't miss it for the world. They want to see him "get his". In any case I doubt many will miss it. It will be great for cycling even if he doesn't "win everything or even win anything". Come on, admit it you guys. You all love a good drama or soap opera and you all claim to love cycling so what's not to like? It'll be like being in a really good all you can eat buffet
line. There may be things you don't like but I guarantee plenty of good stuff.

Dennis Noward

Richrd2205

I'm not sure that "best" is the apposite adjective, however, I understand your point...

Next year will prob have more coverage than since 2005. Whether LA-based coverage with little understanding of the history of cycling is a good thing or not is another question.

IMO, the Simeoni incident would never have been allowed to occur if the coverage had been more cycling-centric. Furthermore, just now, it's as if the only thing that matters in the cycling world is LA's next wee race, not what else might be going on: the next big thing; which neo-pro who's been signed who might make it big; the cyclo-cross season etc etc etc.

DaveyL

Is he taking part in the PTP competition next year as well?

dennisn

Richrd2205 wrote:

I'm not sure that "best" is the apposite adjective, however, I understand your point...

Next year will prob have more coverage than since 2005. Whether LA-based coverage with little understanding of the history of cycling is a good thing or not is another question.

IMO, the Simeoni incident would never have been allowed to occur if the coverage had been more cycling-centric. Furthermore, just now, it's as if the only thing that matters in the cycling world is LA's next wee race, not what else might be going on: the next big thing; which neo-pro who's been signed who might make it big; the cyclo-cross season etc etc etc.

I agree that there is lots more happening than Lance, and cycling fans are pretty much
keyed into what else is going on. It's the people who are marginal fans or new fans that
Lance will appeal to and get them to become interested and enjoy the spectacle of racing bikes. He's one of the worlds most recognized celebrities and will draw the crowds
and onlookers. Some may not like him for whatever reasons but bigger crowds at races
and more television coverage can only be a good thing for cycling in general.

Dennis Noward

Marko1962

I for one am really looking forward to seeing Lance in action simply because of the fact that I am a recent convert to cycling and therefore have missed all of Lance's past wonder years. 2009 has me really excited....

Richrd2205

dennisn wrote:

I agree that there is lots more happening than Lance, and cycling fans are pretty much
keyed into what else is going on. It's the people who are marginal fans or new fans that
Lance will appeal to and get them to become interested and enjoy the spectacle of racing bikes. He's one of the worlds most recognized celebrities and will draw the crowds
and onlookers. Some may not like him for whatever reasons but bigger crowds at races
and more television coverage can only be a good thing for cycling in general.

Dennis Noward

The point for me is that a whole generation of fans would come in with no understanding of the history of the sport &, in consequence, a wildly different view thereof. This happened a few years ago & I'm not sure it really helped (is cycling now a bigger sport than it was pre-Lance? No it isn't).
Cycling is in a difficult position just now &, IMO, to find a sustainable place in world sport, it needs to move forward. LA's comback doesn't help this at all.
The comeback will generate more press coverage, but this is not the be all & end all of the sport.
I understand your point, but think that it's more of a matter of faith/belief than fact: kinda parrallel to the debate in Satre's "Les Mains Sales," how important is principle over popularity?

dennisn

Richrd2205 wrote:

dennisn wrote:

I agree that there is lots more happening than Lance, and cycling fans are pretty much
keyed into what else is going on. It's the people who are marginal fans or new fans that
Lance will appeal to and get them to become interested and enjoy the spectacle of racing bikes. He's one of the worlds most recognized celebrities and will draw the crowds
and onlookers. Some may not like him for whatever reasons but bigger crowds at races
and more television coverage can only be a good thing for cycling in general.

Dennis Noward

The point for me is that a whole generation of fans would come in with no understanding of the history of the sport &, in consequence, a wildly different view thereof. This happened a few years ago & I'm not sure it really helped (is cycling now a bigger sport than it was pre-Lance? No it isn't).
Cycling is in a difficult position just now &, IMO, to find a sustainable place in world sport, it needs to move forward. LA's comback doesn't help this at all.
The comeback will generate more press coverage, but this is not the be all & end all of the sport.
I understand your point, but think that it's more of a matter of faith/belief than fact: kinda parrallel to the debate in Satre's "Les Mains Sales," how important is principle over popularity?

When I started cycling I had "no understanding of the history of the sport". Who does?
People see a bike race, they think maybe they would like to try it, then they come to learn about the sport. Most people don't start a sport knowing everything about it. How can they know all about it without a spending a few years or so riding? Add to that the fact that you don't really need to be a cycling history buff to enjoy riding, watching races, or even racing yourself. It's cycling, "it is what it is" to whomever enjoys it. Nothing is required to enjoy cycling and racing except to ride a bicycle. My 10 year old neice
watched 6 or 7 stages of the TDF with me this summer and was impressed with all the riding day after day and "how can they do it?". This is a very small but really good thing
for cycling and she had never even heard of the TDF. She thought it was great and told me to tell her when more was on the TV. She even asked about Lance and when would he race. She at least had heard of him. This is not a bad thing, her and people like her are the future of cycling. The doom and gloom people will soon be in the past and in reality I believe that people want to look on the bright side of things.

Dennkis Noward

daver1

Is cycl;ing a bigger sport now than it was pre Lance? It depends how you measure it? More money in pro cycling - yes, more press coverage - yes, more mass participant events, more bikes sold (top end road bikes through to basic commuters) - yes. I'm not suggesting that all of the above is due to the LA effect (and those answers may not all be true outside of the UK) but I can't think of a single aspect of cycling in the UK now (as a sport or as a lesiure pursuit) that is not now bigger than it was 10 years ago.

guv001

Surely if someone wants to watch or participate in cycling there is no pre requisite that you know all the history etc. Nobody owns cycling and the 5 year old on a bmx is a much a cyclist as a pro rider. People come and people go I just don't understand why people are so negative about cycling sometimes. As long as yuor enjoying it who cares if the next person knows all the history of cycling or not if he/she is enjoying a race so what.

Kléber

It all depends on your definition of better. If you're of the evangelical type, then you want any publicity for your cause and the more people cycling, the better.

But sometimes I think the focus on one rider, to the exclusion of others, can be unhealthy. Did you know Giro and Vuelta champion Alberto Contador spent last week in a wind tunnel?

Remember, each sport should be more important than any one competitor, if this maxim doesn't hold true, it can be troublesome for the sport.

blazing_saddles

Another

From Dennis. So far he's only had nibbles....no bites!

mercsport

Well , I'm not rising to the bait .

So far though I haven 't noted anything from Denny in the 'Questions for Lance ' thread . :shock:

dennisn

DaveR1 wrote:

Is cycl;ing a bigger sport now than it was pre Lance? It depends how you measure it? More money in pro cycling - yes, more press coverage - yes, more mass participant events, more bikes sold (top end road bikes through to basic commuters) - yes. I'm not suggesting that all of the above is due to the LA effect (and those answers may not all be true outside of the UK) but I can't think of a single aspect of cycling in the UK now (as a sport or as a lesiure pursuit) that is not now bigger than it was 10 years ago.

But doesn't every country have it's up and down periods with specifc sports? They are big then fade a bit and maybe become big again and on and on? Just wait until a guy from England wins the TDF. You should see a spurt in interest.

Dennis Noward

dennisn

Kléber wrote:

It all depends on your definition of better. If you're of the evangelical type, then you want any publicity for your cause and the more people cycling, the better.

But sometimes I think the focus on one rider, to the exclusion of others, can be unhealthy. Did you know Giro and Vuelta champion Alberto Contador spent last week in a wind tunnel?

Remember, each sport should be more important than any one competitor, if this maxim doesn't hold true, it can be troublesome for the sport.

You're right about no one being bigger than the sport. While they may seem bigger for a
period of time personal fame is a fleeting thing but the sport lives on. If you ask a teenager
who Arnold Palmer was / is you might just get a blank stare but mention Tiger Woods and
even if the kid doesn't like golf he knows that Tiger "is" golf(at least for now). Same for cycling, ask who Eddy is, get a blank stare, mention Lance and "oh yeah, he's the man"(at least for now).

Dennis Noward

dennisn

mercsport wrote:

Well , I'm not rising to the bait .

So far though I haven 't noted anything from Denny in the 'Questions for Lance ' thread . :shock:

Don't really have any questions for him. I'm of the opinion that he he is back racing because he likes it. Misses mixing it up with the boys and the excitment of trying to
be the first across the finish line with a big smile on your face. Sort of like the rest of us.

Dennis Noward

Ramanujan

and in reality I believe that people want to look on the bright side of things

that's what got us into this doping mess in the first place.

dennisn

Ramanujan wrote:

and in reality I believe that people want to look on the bright side of things

that's what got us into this doping mess in the first place.

Is it my imagination or does it seem that a lot of cycling "fans" seem MUCH more upset
about "this doping mess" than the average pro rider? I'm trying to go with the opinion
that pros, just like us, wear helmets not halos. For what it's worth, I just don't feel all
the outrage that some people seem to attach to riders who dope. I don't support doping
and I feel that the powers that be are really giving it a good try to catch these guys. Beyond that I watch the races when I can, work as the race director of a local club, and
try to get out riding as my schedule(and wife) permit. I also like the back and forth banter of this forum. Bottom line is that, for me, cheating is a part of most sports from the ground level up and hopefully officials and promoters can find ways to keep it to a minimum. It is,
after all, their job.

Dennis Noward

Kléber

Dennis, the trouble is that many pros are doping, so who knows how the "average pro" feels. But I know how some of the clean ones think, they describe the likes of Ricco as a "hooligan" who has "no place in cycling" who is "stealing jobs", all quotes from this year's Tour.

dennisn

Kléber wrote:

Dennis, the trouble is that many pros are doping, so who knows how the "average pro" feels. But I know how some of the clean ones think, they describe the likes of Ricco as a "hooligan" who has "no place in cycling" who is "stealing jobs", all quotes from this year's Tour.

You have to admit that "they" are catching these guys and at a pretty good pace. Looks like more than a few are going to sit out for a couple of years or so. Riders who dope are
becoming more and more aware(to put it mildly) that testing is ramping up and that spending a couple of years sitting, with no pay, can really put the hurting on your
finances. Maybe the dopers will start to say something like "well, if I dope I might
win a few races, if I don't get caught, and if I don't dope at least I can make a decent living
doing something I love without living in fear of getting bounced out and maybe I just might
catch a win or two. Hopefully the riders will choose the latter although there will always be a few willing to chance it and play dirty.

Dennis Noward

micron

But it was the French anti doping agency that caught the big names this year, through retrospective testing, something that the head of the sport's governing body won't condone. While ever McQuaid's laissez faire attitude prevails, there will always be an incentive to dope. It's an attitude that makes the sport seem rotten and corrupt from the top down, far from the 'few bad apples' that you (and McQuaid and Armstrong for that matter) would have us believe in.

Having seen some brilliant seasons of racing in my time - and footage of some I would love to see - I would say modern racing is most often a formulaic bore, so the thought of the most robotic (hiw ords, not mine) of them all coming back doesn't excite me at all. But, you know, as they say in France, chacun a son gout

dennisn

micron wrote:

But it was the French anti doping agency that caught the big names this year, through retrospective testing, something that the head of the sport's governing body won't condone. While ever McQuaid's laissez faire attitude prevails, there will always be an incentive to dope. It's an attitude that makes the sport seem rotten and corrupt from the top down, far from the 'few bad apples' that you (and McQuaid and Armstrong for that matter) would have us believe in.

Having seen some brilliant seasons of racing in my time - and footage of some I would love to see - I would say modern racing is most often a formulaic bore, so the thought of the most robotic (hiw ords, not mine) of them all coming back doesn't excite me at all. But, you know, as they say in France, chacun a son gout

No, I don't know what they say in France. I'm just here in the states enjoying riding my bike, working with the local racing club, and catching what races I can on TV. Riders
can dope themselves to the eyeballs, if they wish, as far as I'm concerned. I've got enough going on in my life that I don't have the time or the inclination to worry about whether a bunch of overpaid(probably) sports figures(any sport) are doing drugs.
Pro sports(even amateur) is loaded with this kind of thing. At least cycling is out in the open these days(more or less). I think that's a good start. And while "they" may not be moving as fast as some people would like and the punishment is not enough to suit some,
it's moving in the right direction. Change doesn't happen quickly in many human endeavours.

Dennis Noward

richard wants a baum

The first post from you dennis that ive actually seen you give your own pionts of view. nice change.

dennisn

richard wants a baum wrote:

The first post from you dennis that ive actually seen you give your own pionts of view. nice change.

Thanks. Every once in a while I give it a shot that doesn't show my dark side.

dennis noward

leguape

micron wrote:

But it was the French anti doping agency that caught the big names this year, through retrospective testing, something that the head of the sport's governing body won't condone. While ever McQuaid's laissez faire attitude prevails, there will always be an incentive to dope. It's an attitude that makes the sport seem rotten and corrupt from the top down, far from the 'few bad apples' that you (and McQuaid and Armstrong for that matter) would have us believe in.

Having seen some brilliant seasons of racing in my time - and footage of some I would love to see - I would say modern racing is most often a formulaic bore, so the thought of the most robotic (hiw ords, not mine) of them all coming back doesn't excite me at all. But, you know, as they say in France, chacun a son gout

And it was the UCI that caught Vinokourov and Kasheckin last year and Sella this by targeted testing.

It's all very well heaping the praise on on AFLD but remember that they were targeting one race with 180 riders at a time that coincided with the ratification of a new set of tests. They were hardly making a big noise at any of the other ASO races they were tasked with providing testing for were they?

UCI by contrast has to spread its resource a lot wider than AFLD, which is state funded let's not forget.