*Spoliers* Tour de France talk *Spoilers*
Comments
-
As Colin Cooper (Lotus chappy) once said "If you're not cheating, you're not trying hard enough"
But please, take the doping talk over to the road forum where there are many threads on the subject."Impressive break"
"Thanks...
...I can taste blood"0 -
Attica wrote:But please, take the doping talk over to the road forum where there are many threads on the subject.
Ah, but which hybrids do the dopers need to get light recommendations for while they ride without helmets through red lights?0 -
Jamey wrote:Attica wrote:But please, take the doping talk over to the road forum where there are many threads on the subject.
Ah, but which hybrids do the dopers need to get light recommendations for while they ride without helmets through red lights?
Gah!
"Impressive break"
"Thanks...
...I can taste blood"0 -
Attica wrote:As Colin Cooper (Lotus chappy) once said "If you're not cheating, you're not trying hard enough"
Colin Chapman [/pedant]0 -
Il Principe wrote:People allege that LA doped as "everyone else did in the 90's."
Given that logic, Merckx almost certainly doped!
As I understand it the two get on famously.
Neither EPO nor sophisticated hormones were around in Eddy's day - bit of Whizz here and there was about it and not seen as a big deal.Cannondale Supersix / CAAD9 / Boardman 9.0 / Benotto 30000 -
It seems that Mr Cavendish is taking the Green Jersey very seriously indeed. He will not need lessons on the importance of intermediate sprints and has timed his challenge rather neatly, not many "sprinters stages" left until Paris and in the lead
What a smart piece of riding and no strain on the team today. The older I get the faster I was0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:...if Cav started challenging in the intermediate sprints, staying with the peloton in most of the mountains, continued winning the sprints finishes and altered reality to stay with the peloton in the penultimate stage could he be a contender with a credible GC classification?
Sean Kelly, the hardest cyclist of all time, won the overall and points in the 1988 Vuelta, and 3 times placed in the TDF GC top 10 in Green
1982 - Tour de France: 15th GC; Points class winner; Stage 13 win
1983 - Tour de France: 7th GC; Points class winner;
1984 - Tour de France: 5th GC; 2nd Points class
1985 - Tour de France: 4th GC; Points class winner;
1989 - Tour de France: 9th GC; Points class winner
I also have a recollection that at one stage in a TDF he held all the Jerseys, including the now defunct Combined Jersey, possibly while riding for PDM. In the following days it was engineered that leadership one or more would be 'passed' to a teammate.
(this may be similar to my Stephen Roche coming out of the mist memory)
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
FCN 2-4.
"What happens when the hammer goes down, kids?"
"It stays down, Daddy."
"Exactly."0 -
I think back in Kelly's day (and certainly in Merckx's) the green jersey wasn't a "sprinter's" jersey and was purely for consistency across the stages - points weren't weighted towards flat stages / intermediate sprints like nowadays. There used to be a red sprinter's jersey just for the sprinters. It was therefore more likely that green would go to all rounders - people who could climb, tt and do well in the sprints. The old "combined" jersey was a combination of yellow, green, red and polka-dot. Wikipedia probably explains this far more clearly!0
-
Good point, but the gods of cycling history will smite you where you stand for daring to question Merckx. How dare you propose that if Anquetil used amphetamines in the 50's and 60's, Tom Simpson gave himself heart failure by doping shortly after the first controls were notionally introduced and when everyone else was doing it at the time, somehow it doesn't quite ring true that men were men and mystically able to compete all ear round on baguettes and mineral water until someone caught Richard Virenque at it 20 years later. Its preposterous.Il Principe wrote:People allege that LA doped as "everyone else did in the 90's."
Given that logic, Merckx almost certainly doped!
As I understand it the two get on famously.0 -
Il Principe wrote:People allege that LA doped as "everyone else did in the 90's."
Given that logic, Merckx almost certainly doped!
As I understand it the two get on famously.
Merckx defo doped. It was endemic in his era. It's not a criticism; it's just how things were done. I doubt there was a single clean rider in his day, so you can make the argument about even playing field.
There's an interesting rumour I've read about LA's cancer which I may be persuaded to pass on by PM...0 -
-
Greg66 wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:Thor vs Superman
Yeah yeah yeah.
But what about Jaws vs Godzilla? Now that's a proper contest.
But but either Godzilla drowns or Jaws... wait, what's the opposite of drowning? You know, for a fish?
Either way, you need two that work in the same medium.
Jaws versus a Kraken or something...0 -
Always Tyred wrote:Anquetil
as much as admitted doping. There's a quote attributed to him: something like "you can't ride the Tour on water alone", the subtect of which is generally recognised to be that you need something more than sugar in said water.
But that's all from a different era, when very few understood the dangers of doping, much less heaped opprobium on it. I'm not a pro-doper, or an apologist, but I do think it's futile to condemn people who lived and raced by very different standards to those we have today.0 -
lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:Thor vs Superman
Yeah yeah yeah.
But what about Jaws vs Godzilla? Now that's a proper contest.
But but either Godzilla drowns or Jaws... wait, what's the opposite of drowning? You know, for a fish?
Either way, you need two that work in the same medium.
Jaws versus a Kraken or something...
Doesn't a fish suffocate out of water?
That's the thing about the dual though: who succeeds in making sure that it is fought on their terms...0 -
biondino wrote:Attica wrote:As Colin Cooper (Lotus chappy) once said "If you're not cheating, you're not trying hard enough"
Colin Chapman [/pedant]
You're absolutely right old chap, how could I get it so wrong.
(BTW been a Ferrari fan like yourself since the days of Il Leone (sp))"Impressive break"
"Thanks...
...I can taste blood"0 -
Greg66 wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:Thor vs Superman
Yeah yeah yeah.
But what about Jaws vs Godzilla? Now that's a proper contest.
But but either Godzilla drowns or Jaws... wait, what's the opposite of drowning? You know, for a fish?
Either way, you need two that work in the same medium.
Jaws versus a Kraken or something...
Doesn't a fish suffocate out of water?
That's the thing about the duel though: who succeeds in making sure that it is fought on their terms...
But suffocate implies a lack of air, whereas for poor wee fishy it's an excess... mind you, I suppose if you swap 'air' for 'oxygen' that is what kills them. Fair point.0 -
lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:Thor vs Superman
Yeah yeah yeah.
But what about Jaws vs Godzilla? Now that's a proper contest.
But but either Godzilla drowns or Jaws... wait, what's the opposite of drowning? You know, for a fish?
Either way, you need two that work in the same medium.
Jaws versus a Kraken or something...
Doesn't a fish suffocate out of water?
That's the thing about the duel though: who succeeds in making sure that it is fought on their terms...
But suffocate implies a lack of air, whereas for poor wee fishy it's an excess... mind you, I suppose if you swap 'air' for 'oxygen' that is what kills them. Fair point.
How does paper beat rock by covering it?
None of this makes any sense!
Nice catch on the duel spelling “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:Thor vs Superman
Yeah yeah yeah.
But what about Jaws vs Godzilla? Now that's a proper contest.
But but either Godzilla drowns or Jaws... wait, what's the opposite of drowning? You know, for a fish?
Either way, you need two that work in the same medium.
Jaws versus a Kraken or something...
Doesn't a fish suffocate out of water?
That's the thing about the duel though: who succeeds in making sure that it is fought on their terms...
But suffocate implies a lack of air, whereas for poor wee fishy it's an excess... mind you, I suppose if you swap 'air' for 'oxygen' that is what kills them. Fair point.
Fish need oxygenated water flowing through their gills to breath (gills work in the most amazingly cool way - FACT - REALLY!). No water = no oxygen = death by suffocation.
Being a fish sucks.0 -
Greg66 wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:Thor vs Superman
Yeah yeah yeah.
But what about Jaws vs Godzilla? Now that's a proper contest.
But but either Godzilla drowns or Jaws... wait, what's the opposite of drowning? You know, for a fish?
Either way, you need two that work in the same medium.
Jaws versus a Kraken or something...
Doesn't a fish suffocate out of water?
That's the thing about the duel though: who succeeds in making sure that it is fought on their terms...
But suffocate implies a lack of air, whereas for poor wee fishy it's an excess... mind you, I suppose if you swap 'air' for 'oxygen' that is what kills them. Fair point.
Fish need oxygenated water flowing through their gills to breathe (gills work in the most amazingly cool way - FACT - REALLY!). No water = no oxygen = death by suffocation.
Being a fish sucks.
Yeah, it does. Losers. I'm so glad I don't have gills.
Oh, and I'm fixing your spelling as I go - no charge.0 -
Okay, to be fair LiT you don't have that many (genuine) blonde moments, but you really need to think this one through a bit more.lost_in_thought wrote:But suffocate implies a lack of air, whereas for poor wee fishy it's an excess... mind you, I suppose if you swap 'air' for 'oxygen' that is what kills them. Fair point.0 -
lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:Thor vs Superman
Yeah yeah yeah.
But what about Jaws vs Godzilla? Now that's a proper contest.
But but either Godzilla drowns or Jaws... wait, what's the opposite of drowning? You know, for a fish?
Either way, you need two that work in the same medium.
Jaws versus a Kraken or something...
Doesn't a fish suffocate out of water?
That's the thing about the duel though: who succeeds in making sure that it is fought on their terms...
But suffocate implies a lack of air, whereas for poor wee fishy it's an excess... mind you, I suppose if you swap 'air' for 'oxygen' that is what kills them. Fair point.
Fish need oxygenated water flowing through their gills to breathe (gills work in the most amazingly cool way - FACT - REALLY!). No water = no oxygen = death by suffocation.
Being a fish sucks.
Yeah, it does. Losers. I'm so glad I don't have gills.
Oh, and I'm fixing your spelling as I go - no charge.
Nah, you're fixing my typos.
I like that though. Makes me feel like a middle management executive.
This quote box is quite long. Hehehehehe.0 -
Unless, of course, you are French and wildy accusing people of doping is the only shred of comfort you can grasp to explain why no French rider has won since 1985.cjcp wrote:Greg66 wrote:I'm not a pro-doper, or an apologist, but I do think it's futile to condemn people who lived and raced by very different standards to those we have today.
+1.0 -
Always Tyred wrote:
Unless, of course, you are French and wildy accusing people of doping is the only shred of comfort you can grasp to explain why no French rider has won since 1985.cjcp wrote:Greg66 wrote:I'm not a pro-doper, or an apologist, but I do think it's futile to condemn people who lived and raced by very different standards to those we have today.
+1.
Dat iz coz dey wuz crap.0 -
The Alps arrive tomorrow. And I'm working from home. In front of the TV. No coincidence. None whatsoever. FCN 2-4.
"What happens when the hammer goes down, kids?"
"It stays down, Daddy."
"Exactly."0 -
Greg66 wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:Thor vs Superman
Yeah yeah yeah.
But what about Jaws vs Godzilla? Now that's a proper contest.
But but either Godzilla drowns or Jaws... wait, what's the opposite of drowning? You know, for a fish?
Either way, you need two that work in the same medium.
Jaws versus a Kraken or something...
Doesn't a fish suffocate out of water?
That's the thing about the duel though: who succeeds in making sure that it is fought on their terms...
But suffocate implies a lack of air, whereas for poor wee fishy it's an excess... mind you, I suppose if you swap 'air' for 'oxygen' that is what kills them. Fair point.
Fish need oxygenated water flowing through their gills to breathe (gills work in the most amazingly cool way - FACT - REALLY!). No water = no oxygen = death by suffocation.
Being a fish sucks.
Yeah, it does. Losers. I'm so glad I don't have gills.
Oh, and I'm fixing your spelling as I go - no charge.
Nah, you're fixing my typos.
I like that though. Makes me feel like a middle management executive.
This quote box is quite long. Hehehehehe.
Yeah, and bearing in mind it's a conversation about fish in the TdF thread, it must be really annoying... :twisted:0 -
lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:Greg66 wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:Thor vs Superman
Yeah yeah yeah.
But what about Jaws vs Godzilla? Now that's a proper contest.
But but either Godzilla drowns or Jaws... wait, what's the opposite of drowning? You know, for a fish?
Either way, you need two that work in the same medium.
Jaws versus a Kraken or something...
Doesn't a fish suffocate out of water?
That's the thing about the duel though: who succeeds in making sure that it is fought on their terms...
But suffocate implies a lack of air, whereas for poor wee fishy it's an excess... mind you, I suppose if you swap 'air' for 'oxygen' that is what kills them. Fair point.
Fish need oxygenated water flowing through their gills to breathe (gills work in the most amazingly cool way - FACT - REALLY!). No water = no oxygen = death by suffocation.
Being a fish sucks.
Yeah, it does. Losers. I'm so glad I don't have gills.
Oh, and I'm fixing your spelling as I go - no charge.
Nah, you're fixing my typos.
I like that though. Makes me feel like a middle management executive.
This quote box is quite long. Hehehehehe.
Yeah, and bearing in mind it's a conversation about fish in the TdF thread, it must be really annoying... :twisted:
Really really annoying yes
"Impressive break"
"Thanks...
...I can taste blood"0 -
Greg66 wrote:Always Tyred wrote:Anquetil
as much as admitted doping. There's a quote attributed to him: something like "you can't ride the Tour on water alone", the subtect of which is generally recognised to be that you need something more than sugar in said water.
But that's all from a different era, when very few understood the dangers of doping, much less heaped opprobium on it. I'm not a pro-doper, or an apologist, but I do think it's futile to condemn people who lived and raced by very different standards to those we have today.
Doping's part of the history of the sport. Wasn't the TdF mix traditionally a coctail of heroin, cocaine, amphetamines and steroids? It's been arround since the 20's, has been here ever since and certainly isn't going away now.
I don't think the standards have changed all that much over the years, if there's an advantage to be had with little chance of being caught, I suspect the majority would still be tempted. Just look at Cera and blood spinning.pain is temporary, the glory of beating your mates to the top of the hill lasts forever.....................
Revised FCN - 20
