Armstrong to continue in peloton

iainf72

Just not doing the Tour again

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/4886/ ... ion.com%29

I'd wondered what his plans were. Looks like FrenchFighters visual pleasure may be disrupted for a while yet.

frenchfighter

Looks like he needs to understand this. It applied last year, it applied more this year and it certainly applies next year.

La Grande Porte

"It was Roger Legeay, Greg LeMond’s directeur sportif who made the comment to journalist Sam Abt: “What we really want for Greg is for him to leave cycling.. like the great champion his is, with some good victories. We want him to leave by la grande porte.”

Yes, what all cyclists presumably dream of, to leave the sport by the big door, at the peak of their powers, instead of slipping away, barely noticed.

Bernard Hinault had his retirement plans all worked out. By his account, after he won the world championship title in 1980 he decided to retire aged 32 (the end of the 1986 season). That was his plan and he intended to stick by it. And he intended to leave in fine style by winning the worlds title again: “If I’d won the title I’d have hung my bike up that very evening and been the happiest man in the world.”

At one point, on the Col de Vars (1986 Tour), Hinault said he overheard a photographer tell his moto to stay with Hinault, as he was about to abandon. “They wouldn’t have missed such a moment for anything,” Hinault said. “They wanted to see me give up when I was suffering like an animal, but nothing would have made me quit then. The pain was unbearable and yet I continued. I’d rather have died.”

kozzo

frenchfighter wrote:

Yes, what all cyclists presumably dream of, to leave the sport by the big door, at the peak of their powers, instead of slipping away, barely noticed.

Unless you start to slip you don't know your peak...
Applying this philosophy each of tour winners should retire after first win.
Even slipping they were not barely noticed. They were defeated and respected.

Kléber

Armstrong did leave via the "big door", only of course he started a comeback.

Abdoujaparov

Quitting at the top is a nice idea, but often more from the fans' perspective. For the rider, I'd have thought retirement can be quite a scary thought and many of them love the sport so want to keep doing it for as long as possible. No shame in that.

dennisn

Abdoujaparov wrote:

Quitting at the top is a nice idea, but often more from the fans' perspective. For the rider, I'd have thought retirement can be quite a scary thought and many of them love the sport so want to keep doing it for as long as possible. No shame in that.

I agree. People retire from their jobs in all walks of life, only to find that "something" is
missing, or they get bored.

Gingerflash

I think it's nice that he still enjoys racing, even without dominating like he used to.

I remember Carl Foggarty once saying that he didn't particularly enjoy racing motorbikes, but he loved winning and racing motorbikes allowed him to do that.

Clearly Armstrong just loves racing bikes, whether he's winning or not. As long as he doesn't cling on so long that he's humiliating himself, then why not carry on doing what you enjoy? If he rides another couple of seasons without any wins, no-one's going to forget his 7 Tour wins.

dave_1

Abdoujaparov wrote:

Quitting at the top is a nice idea, but often more from the fans' perspective. For the rider, I'd have thought retirement can be quite a scary thought and many of them love the sport so want to keep doing it for as long as possible. No shame in that.

Fignon reckoned it didn' matter how you finished up- he dnfd his last race in autumn 1993 and retired, what you won is what the fans remember best said Fignon. Hard to disagree. Who remembers kelly's last two low key seasons?

rick_chasey

Dave_1 wrote:

Abdoujaparov wrote:

Quitting at the top is a nice idea, but often more from the fans' perspective. For the rider, I'd have thought retirement can be quite a scary thought and many of them love the sport so want to keep doing it for as long as possible. No shame in that.

Fignon reckoned it didn' matter how you finished up- he dnfd his last race in autumn 1993 and retired, what you won is what the fans remember best said Fignon. Hard to disagree. Who remembers kelly's last two low key seasons?

Comebacks are a little different...

dennisn

Rick Chasey wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

Abdoujaparov wrote:

Quitting at the top is a nice idea, but often more from the fans' perspective. For the rider, I'd have thought retirement can be quite a scary thought and many of them love the sport so want to keep doing it for as long as possible. No shame in that.

Fignon reckoned it didn' matter how you finished up- he dnfd his last race in autumn 1993 and retired, what you won is what the fans remember best said Fignon. Hard to disagree. Who remembers kelly's last two low key seasons?

Comebacks are a little different...

Maybe the word comeback is just a little overused. Seems that the media labels everyone who's been out for even a week, for whatever reason, as having a comeback. Someone
retires, thinks the better of it a month later, and sure enough it gets labeled a comeback.

rick_chasey

Armstrong was out for longer than a month Dennis.

Not sure what that comment is in relevance to, given the title of the thread...

paulcuthbert

I remember seeing an interview with Richard Ashcroft once, and he was confused as to why every album he released was labelled a comeback. His argument was "Well I never really went away, did I? I was always working- touring, writing, recording. It's a new album, not a comeback".

I guess this is similar for Lance. Even though he was 'retired', he never really went away did he?

conceptual_primate

paulcuthbert wrote:

I remember seeing an interview with Richard Ashcroft once, and he was confused as to why every album he released was labelled a comeback. His argument was "Well I never really went away, did I? I was always working- touring, writing, recording. It's a new album, not a comeback".

I guess this is similar for Lance. Even though he was 'retired', he never really went away did he?

Don't get this analogy?

Writing-recording-touring-time off-writing-recording... etc is the natural cycle for someone in the music business. Lance 'retiring' then returning 3 years later wasn't normal, or expected. He was in the public eye to a degree yes, but not being paid as a professional rider nor competing at the highest level of the sport. Lance's was a 100% comeback.

dennisn

Rick Chasey wrote:

Armstrong was out for longer than a month Dennis.

Not sure what that comment is in relevance to, given the title of the thread...

Just making a comment on the word comeback. Nothing more.

paulcuthbert

conceptual_primate wrote:

Don't get this analogy?

Writing-recording-touring-time off-writing-recording... etc is the natural cycle for someone in the music business

No pun intended

My point was that people call things a comeback when they aren't a comeback. That's all.

Lance never really went away, so it wasn't a true comeback in every sense of the word. It's not like no one had heard from him for years and he came back out of nowhere. He was never a recluse - unlike the example of Cat Stevens (or whatever he's calling himself this week)

iainf72

He did not hold a UCI licence.

By his own words, he was "not engaged" with cycling.

pedro118118

Personally, I don't think he has gained anything from his comeback.
Which is a real shame, given his iconic status (amongst many) when he retired.

Sadly, I feel he'll come to regret the comeback as a) the original message of 'cancer crusader' hasn't come through, b) he isn't competitive (at lease in terms of winning races) and c) he has put his head above the parapet to have further doping allegations fired at him, as he is still high-profile/newsworthy.

I didn't see the sense in the the comeback at the time and I still don't - he had/has everything to lose and nothing to prove/gain.

paulcuthbert

pedro118118 wrote:

c) he has put his head above the parapet to have further doping allegations fired at him, as he is still high-profile/newsworthy.

I don't agree. If, as Landis stated, he wanted to 'clear his conscience' about his doping, he was going to do that whether Armstrong was in the peloton or sitting on his veranda with a cold beer!

Then again, with Landis, I don't know what to believe!

andyp

I thought he'd come back to cure cancer?

conceptual_primate

paulcuthbert wrote:

conceptual_primate wrote:

Don't get this analogy?

Writing-recording-touring-time off-writing-recording... etc is the natural cycle for someone in the music business

No pun intended

My point was that people call things a comeback when they aren't a comeback. That's all.

Lance never really went away, so it wasn't a true comeback in every sense of the word. It's not like no one had heard from him for years and he came back out of nowhere. He was never a recluse - unlike the example of Cat Stevens (or whatever he's calling himself this week)

haha i wish i could claim conscious credit for that one!

However Lance obviously felt he still had enough verve for pro cycling and wanted to compete again... (intentional this time).

Anyhow, word play aside, I know what you're saying I just think you're over complicating what constitutes a comeback - he retired, he came back; it's a comeback. 8)

dennisn

conceptual_primate wrote:

paulcuthbert wrote:

conceptual_primate wrote:

Don't get this analogy?

Writing-recording-touring-time off-writing-recording... etc is the natural cycle for someone in the music business

No pun intended

My point was that people call things a comeback when they aren't a comeback. That's all.

Lance never really went away, so it wasn't a true comeback in every sense of the word. It's not like no one had heard from him for years and he came back out of nowhere. He was never a recluse - unlike the example of Cat Stevens (or whatever he's calling himself this week)

haha i wish i could claim conscious credit for that one!

However Lance obviously felt he still had enough verve for pro cycling and wanted to compete again... (intentional this time).

Anyhow, word play aside, I know what you're saying I just think you're over complicating what constitutes a comeback - he retired, he came back; it's a comeback. 8)

Maybe it's a little like the word "upgrade".

paulcuthbert

conceptual_primate wrote:

However Lance obviously felt he still had enough verve for pro cycling and wanted to compete again... (intentional this time).

Anyhow, word play aside, I know what you're saying I just think you're over complicating what constitutes a comeback - he retired, he came back; it's a comeback. 8)

Haha, thought so