Big Tex's comeback analysed

frenchfighter

This comeback was much talked about on forums, much hyped in the press, much publicised by the man himself, so what has he actually won if anything?

Jan: Tour Down Under. 29th overall. No stage wins.
Feb: TofC. 7th overall. No stage wins.
Mar: MSR. 125th. Got dropped on the Cipressa.
Vuelta Castilla y Leon. Crashed out on Stage 1.
Apr: SRAM Tour of Gila. 2nd overall. No stage wins. Not a UCI ranked race.
May: Giro d'Italia. 12th overall. No stage wins.
June: 21 Nevada City Classic. 1st. Not a UCI ranked race.
July: Tour de France. 3rd overall. No stage wins.
Aug: Leadville 100 MTB Race. 1st.
Tour of Ireland. Abandoned due to rain.

In summary, no overall wins in UCI ranked races, no stage wins in UCI ranked races, 1st in a race (not even a race with Astana kit), 1st in a MTB race.

So basically average to poor with regard to his performance.

He never won much anyway* but this just goes to show how poor his performance is and how much better so many cyclists are.

Wins in UCI races from '92 to '05: 2,10,3,9,8,3,8,5,8,8,4,11,2

Anonymous

Can you do a compare and contrast to Der Kaiser please?

moray_gub

Is there anybody out there who actually thinks he would have won a lot of races this season anyway ? Irrespective of what you think of him 3rd in the TDF is in no way a poor performance and if it is then what does that say about those that finished behind him ?

frenchfighter

NapoleonD wrote:

Can you do a compare and contrast to Der Kaiser please?

Because I have him as my profile pic for the time being?! The full rez photo of it is INCREDIBLE - I would have it whoever it was.

If your point is that Ullrich didn't win much then so what. I never said he got more wins than Lance. I never said he was one of the riders I liked particularly much.

If however you are being serious, then:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Ullrich#Palmar.C3.A8s

I would rather watch Ullrich anyday than Lance and I would probably rather Ullrich's Palmares than Lance's. But we are getting side-tracked from my original point.

iainf72

frenchfighter wrote:

I would rather watch Ullrich anyday than Lance and I would probably rather Ullrich's Palmares than Lance's. But we are getting side-tracked from my original point.

Why? I'm no Lance fan, but he offered a lot more value in races than Ullrich did.

Armstrong did better than I expected this year. I think he'd have loved to have won a race with UCI points but meh.

frenchfighter

Quite simply. Ullrich provided entertainment, is an interesting character and has an aura.

Sure he would have loved to win a race or even a stage (it was quite obvious), he even tried hard a lot of times, but the fact is he fell short.

Not too sure why some people think his poor performance as listed above is good or better than expected. I would expect someone capable of winning 7 Tours on the trot to be performing significantly better. If you are naturally gifted it should still be there.

The fact is that he was never a winner of note.

Let me also draw your attention to Jens Voigt. He is 1 day older than Lance. He is not a GC contender. This year he won the Critérium International.

Anonymous

frenchfighter wrote:

NapoleonD wrote:

Can you do a compare and contrast to Der Kaiser please?

Because I have him as my profile pic for the time being?! The full rez photo of it is INCREDIBLE - I would have it whoever it was.

If your point is that Ullrich didn't win much then so what. I never said he got more wins than Lance. I never said he was one of the riders I liked particularly much.

If however you are being serious, then:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Ullrich#Palmar.C3.A8s

I would rather watch Ullrich anyday than Lance and I would probably rather Ullrich's Palmares than Lance's. But we are getting side-tracked from my original point.

It wasn't a flaming thing, I was just interested because apart from Chris Boardman (who got me into cycling in the first place) Ullrich is my fave ever cyclist by miles.

moray_gub

frenchfighter wrote:

NapoleonD wrote:

Can you do a compare and contrast to Der Kaiser please?

Because I have him as my profile pic for the time being?! The full rez photo of it is INCREDIBLE - I would have it whoever it was.

If your point is that Ullrich didn't win much then so what. I never said he got more wins than Lance. I never said he was one of the riders I liked particularly much.

If however you are being serious, then:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Ullrich#Palmar.C3.A8s

I would rather watch Ullrich anyday than Lance and I would probably rather Ullrich's Palmares than Lance's. But we are getting side-tracked from my original point.

.So one TDF a Vuelta and a World TT and Olympic RR is better than 7 TDFs and World Road Race championship ?....................em um ok.

moray_gub

frenchfighter wrote:

Not too sure why some people think his poor performance as listed above is good or better than expected. I would expect someone capable of winning 7 Tours on the trot to be performing significantly better. If you are naturally gifted it should still be there.

Sometimes you let your feelings for Lance cloud your judgement and this is one of those occasions.

frenchfighter

Ok cool NapD, I see. Ullrich is uber-photogenic which does it for me. I have some superb photos of him, especially in that great Bianchi strip.

iainf72

frenchfighter wrote:

Quite simply. Ullrich provided entertainment, is an interesting character and has an aura.

Sure he would have loved to win a race or even a stage (it was quite obvious), he even tried hard a lot of times, but the fact is he fell short.

So you liked him because he failed? I quite liked him when he first started out and did those ridiculous, I mean incredible, performances in the Tour. However as time went on I found him incredibly dull

Someone said to me last week that the reason people like him is because he's not Lance.

frenchfighter

iainf72 wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

Quite simply. Ullrich provided entertainment, is an interesting character and has an aura.

Sure he would have loved to win a race or even a stage (it was quite obvious), he even tried hard a lot of times, but the fact is he fell short.

So you liked him because he failed? I quite liked him when he first started out and did those ridiculous, I mean incredible, performances in the Tour. However as time went on I found him incredibly dull

Someone said to me last week that the reason people like him is because he's not Lance.

This thread is about Lance's lack of performance so I will not comment much more on Ullrich.

As I said I never liked him overly much, just more than Lance. In addition, his Palmares clearly shows that he is not a failure (I will not debate this further). That you like him or not has zero influence on whether I like him or not. It is more than perfectly feasible for someone to like a rider and another not to.

disgruntledgoat

This "he never won much" argument is a bit of a red herring isn't it? I'm not a big fan of the guy but in his seven Tour wins, he only failed to win 2 or more stages once, 2004 he owned the race full stop, 2003 he was a more than worthy winner in one of the greatest Tours of all time ever...

He also won a few Dauphines, non?

Your critiscism is that he specialised too much, if i'm understanding you correctly, and my post count is high enough to warrant your attention.

moray_gub

disgruntledgoat wrote:

, and my post count is high enough to warrant your attention.

frenchfighter

DG. You are right in observing the point about specialisation - this is one reason why I don't respect him.

My point however is simply that someone who is hyped to unbelievable amounts is actually a non-performer. Also that if he was a very good rider than at least one UCI win should have been on the cards.

If you look at his entry on CQ, his efficiency is pretty bad too (points per Km, points per race days).

takethehighroad

If there's one thing you can say for definate about Armstrong is that he won a lot of races.

I'll go out on a limb here and say that I think Cav's still not won as many races as Armstrong, and Cav's been in double figures for three years.

I wouldn't say he's underperformed this season, especially with the injury he had. If you're comparing him to someone who's won 7 TDFs, then maybe he shoudl ahve done better, but if you compare him to what he actually is, then I'd say it's about par for the course. OK so Jens won the Criterium International, but I'd say his and Lance's palmares this season are comparable

moray_gub

frenchfighter wrote:

DG. You are right in observing the point about specialisation - this is one reason why I don't respect him.

My point however is simply that someone who is hyped to unbelievable amounts is actually a non-performer. Also that if he was a very good rider than at least one UCI win should have been on the cards.

If you look at his entry on CQ, his efficiency is pretty bad too (points per Km, points per race days).

Its a strange day when a rider finishes 3rd in the Tour de France and this is regarded as a non perfomance :shock:

disgruntledgoat

frenchfighter wrote:

DG. You are right in observing the point about specialisation - this is one reason why I don't respect him.

My point however is simply that someone who is hyped to unbelievable amounts is actually a non-performer. Also that if he was a very good rider than at least one UCI win should have been on the cards.

If you look at his entry on CQ, his efficiency is pretty bad too (points per Km, points per race days).

The same is true of lots of cyclists though Andy Schleck hardly wins, Rasmussen never won, Leipheimer never wins anything of note. Heck even in the 50s it was recognised that a gutsy, doomed breakaway was worth more than a great ride for 4th.

The main focus of the vast majority of cycling coverage is the Tour, Armstrong won the Tour more times than anybody else and was marketed (by himself and his afiliates) to an audience beyond blokes like you and me who can reel off the winners of the Tour of the Med. He changed the sport (this is another debate). In a way, for Armstrong at least, it's not about how much he wins. He doesn't need to win for his comeback to be a success. As Radioshack shows, he's about the legacy now.

Is this that YOU expect him to win to prove the validity of his former career. Because not a lot of riders are winning consistently in their late 30s and those that are tend to be sprinters. When was the last time Simoni won anything, he's virtually the same age.

frenchfighter

Lance Armstrong's previous wins or lack thereof is not what I wanted to write about.

As for Rasmussen, Leipheimer and Schleck:
1. They do not have multiple Grand Tours to their names so I would expect less of them.
2. They do not have an inordinate amount of coverage.
3. They do not come back from retirement thinking they are still the greatest cyclist in the World, muscling their way into a team, imposing themselves in a dis-reputable way, and then have nothing to show for it (I should have mentioned this earlier as it was one of my points).
4. In 2009, Andy won L-B-L (in an incredible fashion), got 2nd at Fleche Wallonne (behind convicted doper Rebellin), won the Luxembourg National RR Champs, and won stage 2 of Tour of Luxembourg. Pretty impressive for a 24 year old.
5. In 2009, Leipheimer won the Tour of California overall, won a stage in TofCalifornia, won the overall in Vuelta a Castilla y Leon (behind none other than the best cyclist in the World) and won a stage 2 of the same race.
6. Rasmussen doesn't count this year so he cannot be compared, but as it stands, he has already won stage 2 of Vuelta a Puebla.
7. This year LA won nothing.

Are you beginning to see where I am coming from and why I have arrived at my opinion? We can discuss flimsical things but when the facts are presented as I have done there is little that can be said to the contary I think.

bigmat

I'm far from a Lance fan, but this thread is a bit pathetic. The guy is 38, has been away from the sport for 3 years and suffered a broken collarbone just as he was getting back into it. For him to have got on the podium at the TdeF was pretty astonishing. I'm sure he would have liked to have won more this year (along with a lot of other cyclists), but he has exceeded what I expected him to do. Also, on the whole "I have no respect for Armstrong" thing, putting the whole did he / didn't he drug issue to one side for a moment, he very nearly died from cancer and came back to win 7 tours straight. What more were you expecting?! Yes he focused on the tour (to the detriment of the rest of the racing calendar) but to be fair this was post cancer. Maybe he had to focus his efforts, rather than work the whole season, because of the effect it had had on his body? And whatever the reason, it worked.

And finally, whatever mud you might want to throw Armstrong's way you should save a bit for Bertie because I'm pretty sure they both prepare for the big races the same way.

mandie

FF
I'm not a great Lance Armstrong fan. I like neither his style of racing nor his personality, but he is still alive, racing (at times) for the next season at least, and as of yet has never tested positive (the topical cortico-steroid cream for saddle sores was not a positive) for any banned substances:-
Get over it for all our sakes.

tailwindhome

Would Bradley Wiggins view 3rd place in the TDF as failure?

frenchfighter

MH. You should have saved yourself the bother of questionning why I respect him or not as I am not going to reply about it and to be honest if you fail to follow the points I have made through the use of facts above, I doubt you will be able to follow my reasoning on the other point.

No need to bring the best cyclist in the World into this, especially when your point is incorrect.

Also, let me make it clear. I will not be goaded by any member into getting into a heated debate over Armstrong or defending Contador, not least as it is a thankless and pointless exercise in trying to make you think otherwise. You can have your opinions and I can have mine, but trying to prod mine will result in no outbursts.

bigmat

Why start the thread if not wanting to prompt the debate? I'll happily leave the last comment I made to one side, all speculation at the end of the day. But really, to slag Armstrong based on his results just seems a little weird.

frenchfighter

MH. I didn't start the thread to talk about whether I respect him, but to talk about his performance this year, so I only want to debate about his performance this year and nothing else.

Isn't the goal of every sportsman regardless of the sport: results? It is therefore entirely normal that I judge Lance09 on his results. I'm not sure how you could see otherwise and think it weird.

disgruntledgoat

Can you point me to an example of him saying he would win the kind of races he used to? Or a 38 year old winning regularly at the top level this year?

mrushton

Armstrongs return was/is as much about marketing as anything else. I'm sure everyone in the cycle industry and the sport must have shrines to him as he generates so much publicity. What are the sales figures for magazines with him on the cover? Irrespective of whether you like/loathe hi, he made cycling a global sport and gave it a great story. Ullrich, well a fantastic rider, sheer class but if you criticize Armstrong for alleged drug use then Ullrich has to be right there with him. When the story finally comes out about him (Jan), it will possibly be quite sad but I'll always think of him on the Bianchi/Walser TT bike powering along, looking like a textbook example of riding a TT bike (except in the wet!!)

frenchfighter

disgruntledgoat wrote:

Can you point me to an example of him saying he would win the kind of races he used to? Or a 38 year old winning regularly at the top level this year?

Oh come on, this is too easy. It is called the Tour de France. Are you now going to tell me that he didn't want to and didn't try to win it?

Your 2nd point is a bit misleading. Whether there are riders his age or not winning races shouldn't matter if he thinks he is capable of winning.
But to satisfy you: Jens as I have mentioned, Fausto who was winning when he was 35, 36 and 37, Rebellin (I know he was on CERA), is 38 and was winning this year, Cédric Vasseur won a Tour stage when he was 38 and Zabel was winning into his late 30s.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

frenchfighter

phips wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

Quite simply. Ullrich provided entertainment, is an interesting character and has an aura.

Fairly easy to say that about Lance, non?

Blimey. Maybe for you, not for me. That should be obvious, n'est pas?

bigmat

As I've already said, I think for a 38 year old coming out of a 3 year retirement to perform as well as he did was pretty astonishing (and as far as I'm aware without precedent). I have no doubt though that he believed he could (and would) win this year's tour and I was delighted when he didn't!