Will Lance be better this year?

dennisn

Blazing Saddles wrote:

prb007 wrote:

I dare you, I double dare you MF ( to quote Samuel L. Jackson)... to bet AGAINST LA winning the TdF for a record 8th time, and go down in the history books as the greatest TdF rider who has ever (and will ever) live.

There's a job going for you at Mills and Boon.
So much Lance love juice from a single man crush, is truly touching.
Might even bring a tear to MG's eye. :P

I'm still waiting for the "I triple DOG dare ya" before I comment.

donrhummy

Jez mon wrote:

The stings idea will allow for instant-ish analysis of specific areas yes. But I would still say it would have a number of disadvantages over a wind tunnel. Not least the fact that the data would be difficult to repeat as it would be affected by the outdoor conditions...

However, I'm not sure how much he trained last year, is he doing that much more this year? I doubt it, for him to have come in and got 4th at le tour last year, he must have been close to his best possible shape and whether he likes it or not, his best possible physical shape is going to continue to decline. No matter how many little bits of string he attaches to his skin suit!!

A couple things:

1. Lance did not place 4th at le Tour. He was 3rd.
2. He was coming off 3.5 years of time away from top cycling
3. He broke his collarbone just THREE AND A HALF months prior to the TDF!!

Yep, that's right. He broke his collarbone on March 23 and the TDF started July 4. That's only 103 days. And you're telling me he was in his best shape ever or even close after 3.5 years off, about 4 months of training before breaking his collarbone and then less than 4 months of training after breaking it? Please.

moray_gub

BikingBernie wrote:

prb007 wrote:

BTW if you have information (re. doping) which the UCI, WADA, etc. etc. haven't been able to discover in nearly 20 yaers of testing LA, please, do share it with us all........muppet!

Given your lowly post count I can only assume you are unaware of all the debates on here that have considered this very topic, and as such are another of those proving the validity of the old adage 'Ignorance is bliss'. ml

You can always rely on the low post count angle from BB to somehow infer his superiority in the subject.

moray_gub

iainf72 wrote:

calvjones wrote:

Yes, last year was a great performance but I think the parcours, the TTT (no ITT - typo earlier) and the 40s echelon gap helped him!

I think I worked out that without those 2 things he would've finished 6'th or 7'th.

If my Auntie had baws she should would be my uncle......................without those 2 things race would have been raced differently . Thats like saying without away goals such and such would have won the Champs league.

mididoctors

prb007 wrote:

I dare you, I double dare you MF ( to quote Samuel L. Jackson)... to bet AGAINST LA winning the TdF for a record 8th time, and go down in the history books as the greatest TdF rider who has ever (and will ever) live.

I'll bet you £100 quid lance does not win the TDF this year?

mididoctors

dennisn wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

prb007 wrote:

I dare you, I double dare you MF ( to quote Samuel L. Jackson)... to bet AGAINST LA winning the TdF for a record 8th time, and go down in the history books as the greatest TdF rider who has ever (and will ever) live.

There's a job going for you at Mills and Boon.
So much Lance love juice from a single man crush, is truly touching.
Might even bring a tear to MG's eye. :P

I'm still waiting for the "I triple DOG dare ya" before I comment.

gabriel959

I personally think he will be better prepared because as someone has stated before he probably won't be coming off an injury (collarbone) and he will be more cycling shape (not upper body mass) but three things go against him:

- Tougher course
- More opponents and in better shape (Sastre, Valverde, Evans, Basso, Wiggo, Menchov...)
- Schelk year older and wiser (better at TTs)?
- Same for Contador?
- Contador's team finally doing the job for the best rider.

All in all, I think he will do well to finish in the Top 5, but cycling is no maths so anything can happen.

dennisn

donrhummy wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

The stings idea will allow for instant-ish analysis of specific areas yes. But I would still say it would have a number of disadvantages over a wind tunnel. Not least the fact that the data would be difficult to repeat as it would be affected by the outdoor conditions...

However, I'm not sure how much he trained last year, is he doing that much more this year? I doubt it, for him to have come in and got 4th at le tour last year, he must have been close to his best possible shape and whether he likes it or not, his best possible physical shape is going to continue to decline. No matter how many little bits of string he attaches to his skin suit!!

A couple things:

1. Lance did not place 4th at le Tour. He was 3rd.
2. He was coming off 3.5 years of time away from top cycling
3. He broke his collarbone just THREE AND A HALF months prior to the TDF!!

Yep, that's right. He broke his collarbone on March 23 and the TDF started July 4. That's only 103 days. And you're telling me he was in his best shape ever or even close after 3.5 years off, about 4 months of training before breaking his collarbone and then less than 4 months of training after breaking it? Please.

Can't argue with that reasoning. But no one pays much atention to me. After all, I'm just another fanboy. Which I didn't even know, until I started on this forum. Tough to find many holes in "donrhummy's" logic.

moray_gub

gabriel959 wrote:

I personally think he will be better prepared because as someone has stated before he probably won't be coming off an injury (collarbone) and he will be more cycling shape (not upper body mass) but three things go against him:

- Tougher course
- More opponents and in better shape (Sastre, Valverde, Evans, Basso, Wiggo, Menchov...)
- Schelk year older and wiser (better at TTs)?
- Same for Contador?
- Contador's team finally doing the job for the best rider.

All in all, I think he will do well to finish in the Top 5, but cycling is no maths so anything can happen.

Not sure what makes you think Sastre and Evans will be in better shape than they were last year they are both heading into the twilight of their careers now Sastre will be 35 and Evans will be 33 by July. They know how to prepare for the Tour and last year both flopped after good preperations .The age arguement used againt Lance could equally be applied to them in particluar Sastre.

gabriel959

Moray Gub wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

I personally think he will be better prepared because as someone has stated before he probably won't be coming off an injury (collarbone) and he will be more cycling shape (not upper body mass) but three things go against him:

- Tougher course
- More opponents and in better shape (Sastre, Valverde, Evans, Basso, Wiggo, Menchov...)
- Schelk year older and wiser (better at TTs)?
- Same for Contador?
- Contador's team finally doing the job for the best rider.

All in all, I think he will do well to finish in the Top 5, but cycling is no maths so anything can happen.

Not sure what makes you think Sastre and Evans will be in better shape than they were last year they are both heading into the twilight of their careers now Sastre will be 35 and Evans will be 33 by July. They know how to prepare for the Tour and last year both flopped after good preperations .The age arguement used againt Lance could equally be applied to them in particluar Sastre.

Sastre had horrendous preparation for the Tour (his words) as he had raced both Vuelta and Giro before the Tour. He should be better prepared this year.

Evans had problems with his team.

iainf72

Moray Gub wrote:

If my Auntie had baws she should would be my uncle......................without those 2 things race would have been raced differently . Thats like saying without away goals such and such would have won the Champs league.

Agreed but all I'm saying is the TTT flattered his result somewhat. Lance's teams always do well in those kind of events but this year he won't be getting any kind of buffer from them.

blazing_saddles

dennisn wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

The stings idea will allow for instant-ish analysis of specific areas yes. But I would still say it would have a number of disadvantages over a wind tunnel. Not least the fact that the data would be difficult to repeat as it would be affected by the outdoor conditions...

However, I'm not sure how much he trained last year, is he doing that much more this year? I doubt it, for him to have come in and got 4th at le tour last year, he must have been close to his best possible shape and whether he likes it or not, his best possible physical shape is going to continue to decline. No matter how many little bits of string he attaches to his skin suit!!

A couple things:

1. Lance did not place 4th at le Tour. He was 3rd.
2. He was coming off 3.5 years of time away from top cycling
3. He broke his collarbone just THREE AND A HALF months prior to the TDF!!

Yep, that's right. He broke his collarbone on March 23 and the TDF started July 4. That's only 103 days. And you're telling me he was in his best shape ever or even close after 3.5 years off, about 4 months of training before breaking his collarbone and then less than 4 months of training after breaking it? Please.

Can't argue with that reasoning. But no one pays much atention to me. After all, I'm just another fanboy. Which I didn't even know, until I started on this forum. Tough to find many holes in "donrhummy's" logic.

There is one big hole in the so called logic. The ability to compete has a finite shelf life and Armstrong is well past his 'best before' date.
If Big Mig announced he was making a comeback, would anybody fancy him to step onto the tour podium?
My guess is nobody and everybody would correctly state age as the defining factor.

In Armstrong's case, folks seem willing to suspend the laws of physics and ignore the limitations of chemistry. MG provides just such an example of counter logic.

Moray Gub wrote:

Not sure what makes you think Sastre and Evans will be in better shape than they were last year they are both heading into the twilight of their careers now Sastre will be 35 and Evans will be 33 by July.

But Lance pushing 39? No problemo. :?

The fact remains, that in Contador and Schleck the Younger, he is up against an exceptional champion entering his prime and a huge potential.

iainf72

donrhummy wrote:

Yep, that's right. He broke his collarbone on March 23 and the TDF started July 4. That's only 103 days. And you're telling me he was in his best shape ever or even close after 3.5 years off, about 4 months of training before breaking his collarbone and then less than 4 months of training after breaking it? Please.

And Vandevelde finished 8'th after breaking his back in the Giro riding in support of Wiggins.

How long was he off the bike after breaking his collarbone? Less than a fricking week. I don't think it affected his preparation that much. By his own admission, training in the US was a mistake (because you can't get proper cheese in the US, no doubt)

My opinion - He'll be worse this year. Probably still be quite good but more fragile than last year.

dennisn

Blazing Saddles wrote:

dennisn wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

The stings idea will allow for instant-ish analysis of specific areas yes. But I would still say it would have a number of disadvantages over a wind tunnel. Not least the fact that the data would be difficult to repeat as it would be affected by the outdoor conditions...

However, I'm not sure how much he trained last year, is he doing that much more this year? I doubt it, for him to have come in and got 4th at le tour last year, he must have been close to his best possible shape and whether he likes it or not, his best possible physical shape is going to continue to decline. No matter how many little bits of string he attaches to his skin suit!!

A couple things:

1. Lance did not place 4th at le Tour. He was 3rd.
2. He was coming off 3.5 years of time away from top cycling
3. He broke his collarbone just THREE AND A HALF months prior to the TDF!!

Yep, that's right. He broke his collarbone on March 23 and the TDF started July 4. That's only 103 days. And you're telling me he was in his best shape ever or even close after 3.5 years off, about 4 months of training before breaking his collarbone and then less than 4 months of training after breaking it? Please.

Can't argue with that reasoning. But no one pays much atention to me. After all, I'm just another fanboy. Which I didn't even know, until I started on this forum. Tough to find many holes in "donrhummy's" logic.

There is one big hole in the so called logic. The ability to compete has a finite shelf life and Armstrong is well past his 'best before' date.
If Big Mig announced he was making a comeback, would anybody fancy him to step onto the tour podium?
My guess is nobody and everybody would correctly state age as the defining factor.

In Armstrong's case, folks seem willing to suspend the laws of physics and ignore the limitations of chemistry.

The fact remains, that in Contador and Schleck the Younger, he is up against an exceptional champion entering his prime and a huge potential.

I guess my thinking is(and was) that 39 is not the end of the world for people. No reason to give up what you love. Especially if you can still place 3rd. in the TDF. I know I would still be out there if it was me AND IF I still wanted to. Wanting to is the big thing for me and IF you're still able to do well(3rd. place is "well" right?), then I'd be out there putting the pressure on those "younger lads" until I didn't want to or couldn't do it. I'll admit that 39 isn't the "normal" age for this type of thing and that time does take it's toll but there are older guys than myself who can "whip up" on guys half my age.

markwalker

dennisn wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

dennisn wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

The stings idea will allow for instant-ish analysis of specific areas yes. But I would still say it would have a number of disadvantages over a wind tunnel. Not least the fact that the data would be difficult to repeat as it would be affected by the outdoor conditions...

However, I'm not sure how much he trained last year, is he doing that much more this year? I doubt it, for him to have come in and got 4th at le tour last year, he must have been close to his best possible shape and whether he likes it or not, his best possible physical shape is going to continue to decline. No matter how many little bits of string he attaches to his skin suit!!

A couple things:

1. Lance did not place 4th at le Tour. He was 3rd.
2. He was coming off 3.5 years of time away from top cycling
3. He broke his collarbone just THREE AND A HALF months prior to the TDF!!

Yep, that's right. He broke his collarbone on March 23 and the TDF started July 4. That's only 103 days. And you're telling me he was in his best shape ever or even close after 3.5 years off, about 4 months of training before breaking his collarbone and then less than 4 months of training after breaking it? Please.

Can't argue with that reasoning. But no one pays much atention to me. After all, I'm just another fanboy. Which I didn't even know, until I started on this forum. Tough to find many holes in "donrhummy's" logic.

There is one big hole in the so called logic. The ability to compete has a finite shelf life and Armstrong is well past his 'best before' date.
If Big Mig announced he was making a comeback, would anybody fancy him to step onto the tour podium?
My guess is nobody and everybody would correctly state age as the defining factor.

In Armstrong's case, folks seem willing to suspend the laws of physics and ignore the limitations of chemistry.

The fact remains, that in Contador and Schleck the Younger, he is up against an exceptional champion entering his prime and a huge potential.

I guess my thinking is(and was) that 39 is not the end of the world for people. No reason to give up what you love. Especially if you can still place 3rd. in the TDF. I know I would still be out there if it was me AND IF I still wanted to. Wanting to is the big thing for me and IF you're still able to do well(3rd. place is "well" right?), then I'd be out there putting the pressure on those "younger lads" until I didn't want to or couldn't do it. I'll admit that 39 isn't the "normal" age for this type of thing and that time does take it's toll but there are older guys than myself who can "whip up" on guys half my age.

+1

donrhummy

Blazing Saddles wrote:

dennisn wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

The stings idea will allow for instant-ish analysis of specific areas yes. But I would still say it would have a number of disadvantages over a wind tunnel. Not least the fact that the data would be difficult to repeat as it would be affected by the outdoor conditions...

However, I'm not sure how much he trained last year, is he doing that much more this year? I doubt it, for him to have come in and got 4th at le tour last year, he must have been close to his best possible shape and whether he likes it or not, his best possible physical shape is going to continue to decline. No matter how many little bits of string he attaches to his skin suit!!

A couple things:

1. Lance did not place 4th at le Tour. He was 3rd.
2. He was coming off 3.5 years of time away from top cycling
3. He broke his collarbone just THREE AND A HALF months prior to the TDF!!

Yep, that's right. He broke his collarbone on March 23 and the TDF started July 4. That's only 103 days. And you're telling me he was in his best shape ever or even close after 3.5 years off, about 4 months of training before breaking his collarbone and then less than 4 months of training after breaking it? Please.

Can't argue with that reasoning. But no one pays much atention to me. After all, I'm just another fanboy. Which I didn't even know, until I started on this forum. Tough to find many holes in "donrhummy's" logic.

There is one big hole in the so called logic. The ability to compete has a finite shelf life and Armstrong is well past his 'best before' date.
If Big Mig announced he was making a comeback, would anybody fancy him to step onto the tour podium?
My guess is nobody and everybody would correctly state age as the defining factor.

In Armstrong's case, folks seem willing to suspend the laws of physics and ignore the limitations of chemistry. MG provides just such an example of counter logic.

Moray Gub wrote:

Not sure what makes you think Sastre and Evans will be in better shape than they were last year they are both heading into the twilight of their careers now Sastre will be 35 and Evans will be 33 by July.

But Lance pushing 39? No problemo. :?

The fact remains, that in Contador and Schleck the Younger, he is up against an exceptional champion entering his prime and a huge potential.

Actually, that's a hole in YOUR logic. Look, if before last year, when Lance announced his comeback, we'd sat here and told you he was going to be better than his last TDF appearance, sure we'd have been talking out our arses. But we now have EVIDENCE that at 38, with about 8 months of training broken up by a broken collarbone Lance can place 3rd in a TDF. We also have evidence that on top of that he spent a LOT of time and energy meeting with politicians DURING and before the races to talk about Cancer and raising money. Given that he placed 3rd and this year is putting most of that aside and has a team 100% behind HIM for victory (which he didn't last year) and he'll have a year of racing behind him and a full year of training just for the TDF, what does his being 12 months older have to do with it?

There's actually a LOT of evidence that IF you train with high intensity, you can be as good or better later in your life. A few examples:

1. Dara Torres actually swam faster at the last Olympics than she had in the past
2. Mark Allen is the 6-time Ironman champion. His first great result in the Ironman was 2nd place in 1986, he was 28 and ran an 8:36:04. At age 37, he WON and ran an 8:20:34!
3. Ned Overend (who's retired and not training as an elite athlete anymore) is 53 years old. His VO2 Max is 71.1ml/kg/min. In 1987, he was tested as 72ml/kg/min VO2 Max. That's a drop of 1.25% in TWENTY TWO YEARS! (Link here: http://www.cygenedirect.com/assets/files/12579.pdf )

Please don't just claim, "He's a year older so he'll be worse." Instead provide evidence that says he MUST be worse because he's a year older.

dennisn

donrhummy wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

dennisn wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

The stings idea will allow for instant-ish analysis of specific areas yes. But I would still say it would have a number of disadvantages over a wind tunnel. Not least the fact that the data would be difficult to repeat as it would be affected by the outdoor conditions...

However, I'm not sure how much he trained last year, is he doing that much more this year? I doubt it, for him to have come in and got 4th at le tour last year, he must have been close to his best possible shape and whether he likes it or not, his best possible physical shape is going to continue to decline. No matter how many little bits of string he attaches to his skin suit!!

A couple things:

1. Lance did not place 4th at le Tour. He was 3rd.
2. He was coming off 3.5 years of time away from top cycling
3. He broke his collarbone just THREE AND A HALF months prior to the TDF!!

Yep, that's right. He broke his collarbone on March 23 and the TDF started July 4. That's only 103 days. And you're telling me he was in his best shape ever or even close after 3.5 years off, about 4 months of training before breaking his collarbone and then less than 4 months of training after breaking it? Please.

Can't argue with that reasoning. But no one pays much atention to me. After all, I'm just another fanboy. Which I didn't even know, until I started on this forum. Tough to find many holes in "donrhummy's" logic.

There is one big hole in the so called logic. The ability to compete has a finite shelf life and Armstrong is well past his 'best before' date.
If Big Mig announced he was making a comeback, would anybody fancy him to step onto the tour podium?
My guess is nobody and everybody would correctly state age as the defining factor.

In Armstrong's case, folks seem willing to suspend the laws of physics and ignore the limitations of chemistry. MG provides just such an example of counter logic.

Moray Gub wrote:

Not sure what makes you think Sastre and Evans will be in better shape than they were last year they are both heading into the twilight of their careers now Sastre will be 35 and Evans will be 33 by July.

But Lance pushing 39? No problemo. :?

The fact remains, that in Contador and Schleck the Younger, he is up against an exceptional champion entering his prime and a huge potential.

Actually, that's a hole in YOUR logic. Look, if before last year, when Lance announced his comeback, we'd sat here and told you he was going to be better than his last TDF appearance, sure we'd have been talking out our arses. But we now have EVIDENCE that at 38, with about 8 months of training broken up by a broken collarbone Lance can place 3rd in a TDF. We also have evidence that on top of that he spent a LOT of time and energy meeting with politicians DURING and before the races to talk about Cancer and raising money. Given that he placed 3rd and this year is putting most of that aside and has a team 100% behind HIM for victory (which he didn't last year) and he'll have a year of racing behind him and a full year of training just for the TDF, what does his being 12 months older have to do with it?

There's actually a LOT of evidence that IF you train with high intensity, you can be as good or better later in your life. A few examples:

1. Dara Torres actually swam faster at the last Olympics than she had in the past
2. Mark Allen is the 6-time Ironman champion. His first great result in the Ironman was 2nd place in 1986, he was 28 and ran an 8:36:04. At age 37, he WON and ran an 8:20:34!
3. Ned Overend (who's retired and not training as an elite athlete anymore) is 53 years old. His VO2 Max is 71.1ml/kg/min. In 1987, he was tested as 72ml/kg/min VO2 Max. That's a drop of 1.25% in TWENTY TWO YEARS! (Link here: http://www.cygenedirect.com/assets/files/12579.pdf )

Please don't just claim, "He's a year older so he'll be worse." Instead provide evidence that says he MUST be worse because he's a year older.

Nicely said. Although don't use me as an example of BETTER as you get older.

rockmount

dennisn wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

dennisn wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

The stings idea will allow for instant-ish analysis of specific areas yes. But I would still say it would have a number of disadvantages over a wind tunnel. Not least the fact that the data would be difficult to repeat as it would be affected by the outdoor conditions...

However, I'm not sure how much he trained last year, is he doing that much more this year? I doubt it, for him to have come in and got 4th at le tour last year, he must have been close to his best possible shape and whether he likes it or not, his best possible physical shape is going to continue to decline. No matter how many little bits of string he attaches to his skin suit!!

A couple things:

1. Lance did not place 4th at le Tour. He was 3rd.
2. He was coming off 3.5 years of time away from top cycling
3. He broke his collarbone just THREE AND A HALF months prior to the TDF!!

Yep, that's right. He broke his collarbone on March 23 and the TDF started July 4. That's only 103 days. And you're telling me he was in his best shape ever or even close after 3.5 years off, about 4 months of training before breaking his collarbone and then less than 4 months of training after breaking it? Please.

Can't argue with that reasoning. But no one pays much atention to me. After all, I'm just another fanboy. Which I didn't even know, until I started on this forum. Tough to find many holes in "donrhummy's" logic.

There is one big hole in the so called logic. The ability to compete has a finite shelf life and Armstrong is well past his 'best before' date.
If Big Mig announced he was making a comeback, would anybody fancy him to step onto the tour podium?
My guess is nobody and everybody would correctly state age as the defining factor.

In Armstrong's case, folks seem willing to suspend the laws of physics and ignore the limitations of chemistry. MG provides just such an example of counter logic.

Moray Gub wrote:

Not sure what makes you think Sastre and Evans will be in better shape than they were last year they are both heading into the twilight of their careers now Sastre will be 35 and Evans will be 33 by July.

But Lance pushing 39? No problemo. :?

The fact remains, that in Contador and Schleck the Younger, he is up against an exceptional champion entering his prime and a huge potential.

Actually, that's a hole in YOUR logic. Look, if before last year, when Lance announced his comeback, we'd sat here and told you he was going to be better than his last TDF appearance, sure we'd have been talking out our arses. But we now have EVIDENCE that at 38, with about 8 months of training broken up by a broken collarbone Lance can place 3rd in a TDF. We also have evidence that on top of that he spent a LOT of time and energy meeting with politicians DURING and before the races to talk about Cancer and raising money. Given that he placed 3rd and this year is putting most of that aside and has a team 100% behind HIM for victory (which he didn't last year) and he'll have a year of racing behind him and a full year of training just for the TDF, what does his being 12 months older have to do with it?

There's actually a LOT of evidence that IF you train with high intensity, you can be as good or better later in your life. A few examples:

1. Dara Torres actually swam faster at the last Olympics than she had in the past
2. Mark Allen is the 6-time Ironman champion. His first great result in the Ironman was 2nd place in 1986, he was 28 and ran an 8:36:04. At age 37, he WON and ran an 8:20:34!
3. Ned Overend (who's retired and not training as an elite athlete anymore) is 53 years old. His VO2 Max is 71.1ml/kg/min. In 1987, he was tested as 72ml/kg/min VO2 Max. That's a drop of 1.25% in TWENTY TWO YEARS! (Link here: http://www.cygenedirect.com/assets/files/12579.pdf )

Please don't just claim, "He's a year older so he'll be worse." Instead provide evidence that says he MUST be worse because he's a year older.

Nicely said. Although don't use me as an example of BETTER as you get older.

++1 Though I'm quite sure that even if he wins, the usual cranks will be along to tell us it was still a poor performance ... because the parcours was easy, there was a blue moon, or the opposition was distracted by flying pigs !!!

greeny12

If Armstrong wins the Tour I'll do the 2011 Dragon Ride stark naked...

I just can't see it, although at 42 years old and trying to improve year-on-year as a road cyclist after only taking it up three years ago I guess I should be rooting for him!!

Jez mon

donrhummy wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

The stings idea will allow for instant-ish analysis of specific areas yes. But I would still say it would have a number of disadvantages over a wind tunnel. Not least the fact that the data would be difficult to repeat as it would be affected by the outdoor conditions...

However, I'm not sure how much he trained last year, is he doing that much more this year? I doubt it, for him to have come in and got 4th at le tour last year, he must have been close to his best possible shape and whether he likes it or not, his best possible physical shape is going to continue to decline. No matter how many little bits of string he attaches to his skin suit!!

A couple things:

1. Lance did not place 4th at le Tour. He was 3rd.
2. He was coming off 3.5 years of time away from top cycling
3. He broke his collarbone just THREE AND A HALF months prior to the TDF!!

Yep, that's right. He broke his collarbone on March 23 and the TDF started July 4. That's only 103 days. And you're telling me he was in his best shape ever or even close after 3.5 years off, about 4 months of training before breaking his collarbone and then less than 4 months of training after breaking it? Please.

My mistake, my brain doesn't work too well at that time in the morning sorry!

However, WRT last year's training, I believe he probably did quite a bit before March, besides it's not like he had 3.5 years on the sofa I'm also willing to bet that by the time he announced his comeback, he was in pretty good shape. By best possible shape, I mean best possible, not his best ever and the fact is I can't see him getting close to his tour winning form again.

calvjones

Interesting assessment of Lance's chances from one of his good friends on ES:

"...David Millar's assessment of one former Tour champ: "Alberto is better than Lance ever was, and Lance knows it. Lance knows that if he raced against Contador at his peak, [Contador] would beat him."

Apologies if this has been posted before.

jerry3571

This has already been posted I'm sure.

http://triathlon.competitor.com/2009/07 ... -2010_3250

Any idiot would know that you are either a cyclist or a triathlete. After the Tour has gone then Armstrong looks as though he's going to have his 2nd childhood and start to wear underpants for his bike riding. If he swims to a good standard then his shoulders and back will get bigger and this will cancel his cycling career as he won't be able to perform in the Mountains as he will be too heavy.
I think in his off years, when he retired, he'd done a lot of running and some swimming. He did that fatal mistake of getting a bit if extra muscle on his upper body and calf muscles. If you look at youtube you can see the difference between "Tour winning" Lance and the present day "Tour losing Lance". He must manage to get more muscle off him before this July. Last year's Tour was the leanest I have seen Lance and it was horrible to look at.
If his form was lacking due to his crash, he should have been able to ride himself in to form but the last TT of the Tour was a bad ride (worst I have seen him do, post cancer).
So I don't think he was under trained.
His age is going to be the other major hurdle. Most riders get 5 good years. He had the years before his cancer and all the years after; so he is not a late developer.

Contador, except for a screw up at Paris Nice, is unrivalled in the Grand Tours.
Except for the Cobbles in the Tour, Contador will stick to Lance's back wheel (as Lance knows how to ride in a group without screwing up) and then drop him on the climbs.
Lance may be looking to get the Yellow Jersey before the Mountains or a stage win at best.

-Jerry

BikingBernie

Moray Gub wrote:

BikingBernie wrote:

prb007 wrote:

BTW if you have information (re. doping) which the UCI, WADA, etc. etc. haven't been able to discover in nearly 20 yaers of testing LA, please, do share it with us all........muppet!

Given your lowly post count I can only assume you are unaware of all the debates on here that have considered this very topic, and as such are another of those proving the validity of the old adage 'Ignorance is bliss'. ml

You can always rely on the low post count angle from BB to somehow infer his superiority in the subject.

:roll:

I have highlighted the important bit for you...

always_tyred

calvjones wrote:

Interesting assessment of Lance's chances from one of his good friends on ES:

"...David Millar's assessment of one former Tour champ: "Alberto is better than Lance ever was, and Lance knows it. Lance knows that if he raced against Contador at his peak, [Contador] would beat him."

Apologies if this has been posted before.

Is this the same David Millar who claimed that he would have won those world TT titles without EPO and was annoyed at himself for taking it? Obviously, he's got right back to the same level since his return and his assessments are on the money.

With the best will in the world, he's not the sharpest tool in the shed.

BikingBernie

Blazing Saddles wrote:

In Armstrong's case, folks seem willing to suspend the laws of physics and ignore the limitations of chemistry.

Perhaps this year Armstrong will show us that our understanding of the limits of chemistry needs some modification.

blazing_saddles

donrhummy wrote:

what does his being 12 months older have to do with it?

There's actually a LOT of evidence that IF you train with high intensity, you can be as good or better later in your life. A few examples:

1. Dara Torres actually swam faster at the last Olympics than she had in the past
2. Mark Allen is the 6-time Ironman champion. His first great result in the Ironman was 2nd place in 1986, he was 28 and ran an 8:36:04. At age 37, he WON and ran an 8:20:34!
3. Ned Overend (who's retired and not training as an elite athlete anymore) is 53 years old. His VO2 Max is 71.1ml/kg/min. In 1987, he was tested as 72ml/kg/min VO2 Max. That's a drop of 1.25% in TWENTY TWO YEARS! (Link here: http://www.cygenedirect.com/assets/files/12579.pdf )

Please don't just claim, "He's a year older so he'll be worse." Instead provide evidence that says he MUST be worse because he's a year older.

Something tells me you been swallowing Chris Comical's latest fairy story.

You have the cheek to ask me to supply you with evidence that age is a factor, when your LOT of evidence is based on Ned Overend's VO2 max and a couple of people who are obscure to say the least?

OK.
List of 39 YO Tour Winners




List of 38 YO Tour Winners





List of 37 YO Tour Winners






List of 36 YO Tour Winners

Firmin Lambot...................1922!

Yeah, these older guys sure do have a monopoly on the Tour.

How can the man who supposedly trained harder than everyone else, now train even harder to be better than when he was in his prime?

Jeez, they must have been an idle bunch, a decade ago.

Fact is, the ONLY way Armstrong can reach a sustained higher output level, is with an improved range of Pharmaceutical products.
Only the starriest eyed fanboys could rationalise it, any other way.

afx237vi

Always Tyred wrote:

calvjones wrote:

Interesting assessment of Lance's chances from one of his good friends on ES:

"...David Millar's assessment of one former Tour champ: "Alberto is better than Lance ever was, and Lance knows it. Lance knows that if he raced against Contador at his peak, [Contador] would beat him."

Apologies if this has been posted before.

Is this the same David Millar who claimed that he would have won those world TT titles without EPO and was annoyed at himself for taking it? Obviously, he's got right back to the same level since his return and his assessments are on the money.

With the best will in the world, he's not the sharpest tool in the shed.

Why are you so sure he's wrong? Contador is 27 and has won 4 grand tours. Armstrong at 27 had won none.

I think it's fair to say Contador has more natural talent than Armstrong. Whenever people talk about Armstrong's characteristics they use terms like "grit" and "determination" and give us the line about training on christmas day. There's no doubting his talent, obviously, but it's clear he had to work damn hard for the payoff.

I think Contador is different. He was on the beach a week before the 2008 Giro started...

london-red

My prediction, for what it's worth, Armstrong will bully his way on to the podium but Contador will win it comfortably.

edhornby

and has a team 100% behind HIM for victory (which he didn't last year)

sorry Dennis but I call BS on that point - LA came 4th in his team in the prologue ! Contador, Leipheimer and Kloden were all faster than him

Contador was instructed by Bruyneel not to attack on arcalis

he even had someone else's (ColumbiaHTC) team helping the american based riders pull the echelon away from his team mate

I think LA won't podium this year, the schleks, Contador, Wiggins, Evans and Sastre will be well prepared and the lack of a TTT won't skew the result

moray_gub

Blazing Saddles wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

as making a comeback, would anybody fancy him to step onto the tour podium?
My guess is nobody and everybody would correctly state age as the defining factor.

In Armstrong's case, folks seem willing to suspend the laws of physics and ignore the limitations of chemistry. MG provides just such an example of counter logic.

Moray Gub wrote:

Not sure what makes you think Sastre and Evans will be in better shape than they were last year they are both heading into the twilight of their careers now Sastre will be 35 and Evans will be 33 by July.

But Lance pushing 39? No problemo. :?

The fact remains, that in Contador and Schleck the Younger, he is up against an exceptional champion entering his prime and a huge potential.

Nobody least of all me is disputing that he is some way off those two but as for the rest he is on par id say and he probably will be better prepared this year thatn last evet taking into account the extra year, i was making the point you cant argue the age thing against Lance yet not put it forward for Sastre as seems to be the case.