Wiggo in 2012
Comments
-
LeicesterLad wrote:
My point was why are we sending our top cyclist to focus on the olympics, as is the norm with cycling when some OTHER sports send in the wannabe brigade..eg, olympic football...
I'm not sure you'll see any of them focussing on the Olympics specifically. It might be one of their goals for the season, but a season is so long they'll have many goals. There seemed to be no shortage of decent riders from other countries turning out to take part in the test event, so I can only assume they're also taking it reasonably seriously.
As for football and wannabe brigade, due to the professional v amateur thing (Olympics until recently was still an amateur thing) they bought in a rule that with the exception of three overage players the team has to consist of U23 players.0 -
LeicesterLad wrote:ShinyHelmut wrote:Yes, that Lance Armstrong chap, a bit mickey mouse isn't he?
And Indurain, he never really amounted to much outside the Olympics did he?
Again missed the point a little havn't you...
My point was why are we sending our top cyclist to focus on the olympics, as is the norm with cycling when some OTHER sports send in the wannabe brigade..eg, olympic football...
As for Lance Armstrong, he's probably the biggest Micky Mouse cyclist that ever lived, IMHO.
Obviously I have completely missed the point. Please explain why we should send anyone other than our best cyclists to the Olympics.0 -
ShinyHelmut wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:ShinyHelmut wrote:Yes, that Lance Armstrong chap, a bit mickey mouse isn't he?
And Indurain, he never really amounted to much outside the Olympics did he?
Again missed the point a little havn't you...
My point was why are we sending our top cyclist to focus on the olympics, as is the norm with cycling when some OTHER sports send in the wannabe brigade..eg, olympic football...
As for Lance Armstrong, he's probably the biggest Micky Mouse cyclist that ever lived, IMHO.
Obviously I have completely missed the point. Please explain why we should send anyone other than our best cyclists to the Olympics.
Im not saying we shouldn't, im just saying Pro Cyclists should take the TdF over the olympics any day of the week, alot of other sports clearly are not that bothered by the olympics, such as the Football, Boxing, Tennis who send second rate sportsman to compete. I can see why its the be all and end all for track and field, but not for other sports...0 -
Surely it's up to the individual cyclist to decide which event will further his career/benefit his bank balance more. If wiggins fancies another gong then that's his choice. Board man will always be the Olympic medal winning cyclist not the multiple tdf prelude winner. Maybe thing are changing but for now, in this country, the Olympics are bigger than the tour.0
-
LeicesterLad wrote:ShinyHelmut wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:ShinyHelmut wrote:Yes, that Lance Armstrong chap, a bit mickey mouse isn't he?
And Indurain, he never really amounted to much outside the Olympics did he?
Again missed the point a little havn't you...
My point was why are we sending our top cyclist to focus on the olympics, as is the norm with cycling when some OTHER sports send in the wannabe brigade..eg, olympic football...
As for Lance Armstrong, he's probably the biggest Micky Mouse cyclist that ever lived, IMHO.
Obviously I have completely missed the point. Please explain why we should send anyone other than our best cyclists to the Olympics.
Im not saying we shouldn't, im just saying Pro Cyclists should take the TdF over the olympics any day of the week, alot of other sports clearly are not that bothered by the olympics, such as the Football, Boxing, Tennis who send second rate sportsman to compete. I can see why its the be all and end all for track and field, but not for other sports...
Football has been dealt with above, boxing is amateur - the boxers at the Olympics are the best amateur boxers and the Olympics is the biggest prize. Tennis? You might be right there, but then its very much an individual sport where players are chasing the $ - in my view probably shouldn't even be in the Olympics (and golf even more so). Cycling was amateur until, what, 1996? Since then its become quite a big deal amongst the pros, I'd say less than the Worlds but for someone like Cav, given its in the UK and the British obsession with the Olympics, winning it will be a massive deal.0 -
ShinyHelmut wrote:Surely it's up to the individual cyclist to decide which event will further his career/benefit his bank balance more. If wiggins fancies another gong then that's his choice. Board man will always be the Olympic medal winning cyclist not the multiple tdf prelude winner. Maybe thing are changing but for now, in this country, the Olympics are bigger than the tour.
Thats what i mean though, i can't imagine road cyclists taking up the sport to win an olympic medal, i can imagine them taking up the sport to ride the TdF, which is why im surprised there's such a dilema between the two.0 -
BigMat wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:ShinyHelmut wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:ShinyHelmut wrote:Yes, that Lance Armstrong chap, a bit mickey mouse isn't he?
And Indurain, he never really amounted to much outside the Olympics did he?
Again missed the point a little havn't you...
My point was why are we sending our top cyclist to focus on the olympics, as is the norm with cycling when some OTHER sports send in the wannabe brigade..eg, olympic football...
As for Lance Armstrong, he's probably the biggest Micky Mouse cyclist that ever lived, IMHO.
Obviously I have completely missed the point. Please explain why we should send anyone other than our best cyclists to the Olympics.
Im not saying we shouldn't, im just saying Pro Cyclists should take the TdF over the olympics any day of the week, alot of other sports clearly are not that bothered by the olympics, such as the Football, Boxing, Tennis who send second rate sportsman to compete. I can see why its the be all and end all for track and field, but not for other sports...
Football has been dealt with above, boxing is amateur - the boxers at the Olympics are the best amateur boxers and the Olympics is the biggest prize. Tennis? You might be right there, but then its very much an individual sport where players are chasing the $ - in my view probably shouldn't even be in the Olympics (and golf even more so). Cycling was amateur until, what, 1996? Since then its become quite a big deal amongst the pros, I'd say less than the Worlds but for someone like Cav, given its in the UK and the British obsession with the Olympics, winning it will be a massive deal.
Good explanation, thanks!
Golf and Rugby are both being considered for future olympics, not sure what purpose it would serve.0 -
LeicesterLad wrote:alot of other sports clearly are not that bothered by the olympics, such as the Football, Boxing, Tennis who send second rate sportsman to compete.
Football and boxing have been dealt with, so here is a list of gold medalists from the tennis tournament at the 2008 Olympics:
Men's Singles: Rafael Nadal
Women's Singles: Elena Dementieva
Men's Doubles: Roger Federer & Stanislas Wawrinka
Women's Doubles: Venus & Serena Williams0 -
double post, sorry.0
-
Oh well, nevermind, i tried to have a debate. Ive been beaten, but i managed not to call anyone a tw*t, which i think is quite good.
The olympics is still sh*t though.0 -
The Olympics is a glorified one-dayer.
Who remembers the '96 olympic winner?
Who remembers the '96 Tour winner?
Exactly.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:The Olympics is a glorified one-dayer.
Who remembers the '96 olympic winner?
Who remembers the '96 Tour winner?
Exactly.
I do. Pascal Richard. Sciandri was third.
The riders who have won it seem pretty proud of it. It's certainly important and more meaningful to the general public than any monument.Twitter: @RichN950 -
LeicesterLad wrote:BigMat wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:ShinyHelmut wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:ShinyHelmut wrote:Yes, that Lance Armstrong chap, a bit mickey mouse isn't he?
And Indurain, he never really amounted to much outside the Olympics did he?
Again missed the point a little havn't you...
My point was why are we sending our top cyclist to focus on the olympics, as is the norm with cycling when some OTHER sports send in the wannabe brigade..eg, olympic football...
As for Lance Armstrong, he's probably the biggest Micky Mouse cyclist that ever lived, IMHO.
Obviously I have completely missed the point. Please explain why we should send anyone other than our best cyclists to the Olympics.
Im not saying we shouldn't, im just saying Pro Cyclists should take the TdF over the olympics any day of the week, alot of other sports clearly are not that bothered by the olympics, such as the Football, Boxing, Tennis who send second rate sportsman to compete. I can see why its the be all and end all for track and field, but not for other sports...
Football has been dealt with above, boxing is amateur - the boxers at the Olympics are the best amateur boxers and the Olympics is the biggest prize. Tennis? You might be right there, but then its very much an individual sport where players are chasing the $ - in my view probably shouldn't even be in the Olympics (and golf even more so). Cycling was amateur until, what, 1996? Since then its become quite a big deal amongst the pros, I'd say less than the Worlds but for someone like Cav, given its in the UK and the British obsession with the Olympics, winning it will be a massive deal.
Good explanation, thanks!
Golf and Rugby are both being considered for future olympics, not sure what purpose it would serve.
I think golf is in for London, at least as a "test" event. Bit of a joke, that, in my humble opinion.0 -
BigMat wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:BigMat wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:ShinyHelmut wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:ShinyHelmut wrote:Yes, that Lance Armstrong chap, a bit mickey mouse isn't he?
And Indurain, he never really amounted to much outside the Olympics did he?
Again missed the point a little havn't you...
My point was why are we sending our top cyclist to focus on the olympics, as is the norm with cycling when some OTHER sports send in the wannabe brigade..eg, olympic football...
As for Lance Armstrong, he's probably the biggest Micky Mouse cyclist that ever lived, IMHO.
Obviously I have completely missed the point. Please explain why we should send anyone other than our best cyclists to the Olympics.
Im not saying we shouldn't, im just saying Pro Cyclists should take the TdF over the olympics any day of the week, alot of other sports clearly are not that bothered by the olympics, such as the Football, Boxing, Tennis who send second rate sportsman to compete. I can see why its the be all and end all for track and field, but not for other sports...
Football has been dealt with above, boxing is amateur - the boxers at the Olympics are the best amateur boxers and the Olympics is the biggest prize. Tennis? You might be right there, but then its very much an individual sport where players are chasing the $ - in my view probably shouldn't even be in the Olympics (and golf even more so). Cycling was amateur until, what, 1996? Since then its become quite a big deal amongst the pros, I'd say less than the Worlds but for someone like Cav, given its in the UK and the British obsession with the Olympics, winning it will be a massive deal.
Good explanation, thanks!
Golf and Rugby are both being considered for future olympics, not sure what purpose it would serve.
I think golf is in for London, at least as a "test" event. Bit of a joke, that, in my humble opinion.
It's Rugby sevens, not the 15-a-side game. Going to be a full event with golf in 2016.0 -
I'd say in cycling a tour or prestigious one dayer is bigger than Olympic gold. Just as in football, for the players, the Champions League is the bigger deal than the world cup. In rugby it is the world cup or, for me, the Lions Tour is the pinnacle for a British player.
If I was Wiggo I'd concentrate on the tour if I thought I had a chance of winning it. If I didn't, I'd look to clean up in London 2012. The public might not understand it but fck em. I'm more interested in the history and great winners of the tour or the Hell of the North. Olympics is for the public rather than the more serious cycling fans....imho.0 -
verylonglegs wrote:BigMat wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:BigMat wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:ShinyHelmut wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:ShinyHelmut wrote:Yes, that Lance Armstrong chap, a bit mickey mouse isn't he?
And Indurain, he never really amounted to much outside the Olympics did he?
Again missed the point a little havn't you...
My point was why are we sending our top cyclist to focus on the olympics, as is the norm with cycling when some OTHER sports send in the wannabe brigade..eg, olympic football...
As for Lance Armstrong, he's probably the biggest Micky Mouse cyclist that ever lived, IMHO.
Obviously I have completely missed the point. Please explain why we should send anyone other than our best cyclists to the Olympics.
Im not saying we shouldn't, im just saying Pro Cyclists should take the TdF over the olympics any day of the week, alot of other sports clearly are not that bothered by the olympics, such as the Football, Boxing, Tennis who send second rate sportsman to compete. I can see why its the be all and end all for track and field, but not for other sports...
Football has been dealt with above, boxing is amateur - the boxers at the Olympics are the best amateur boxers and the Olympics is the biggest prize. Tennis? You might be right there, but then its very much an individual sport where players are chasing the $ - in my view probably shouldn't even be in the Olympics (and golf even more so). Cycling was amateur until, what, 1996? Since then its become quite a big deal amongst the pros, I'd say less than the Worlds but for someone like Cav, given its in the UK and the British obsession with the Olympics, winning it will be a massive deal.
Good explanation, thanks!
Golf and Rugby are both being considered for future olympics, not sure what purpose it would serve.
I think golf is in for London, at least as a "test" event. Bit of a joke, that, in my humble opinion.
It's Rugby sevens, not the 15-a-side game. Going to be a full event with golf in 2016.
Rugby sevens? Jeez...they'll have tiddlywinks soon
0 -
ShinyHelmut wrote:Surely it's up to the individual cyclist to decide which event will further his career/benefit his bank balance more. If wiggins fancies another gong then that's his choice. Board man will always be the Olympic medal winning cyclist not the multiple tdf prelude winner. Maybe thing are changing but for now, in this country, the Olympics are bigger than the tour.
It's often said but I don't believe it. If we had a cyclist win the TdF he'd be a big name in this country - it'd be bigger than winning an Olympic medal even for non-cycling fans.
it's a hard life if you don't weaken.0 -
Common sense in an uncommon degree is what the world calls wisdom0
-
NervexProf wrote:
Team Pursuit surprises me.0 -
-
He'd be brave to try for them all IMO. Not to say it can't be done though. What price at Ladbrokes would you get for that? I think they'll push for Cav in the RR though. It is doable I think. It'd be like riding a shorter Tour I suppose. Tine trial first, followed by Team pursuit, which is kinda like a time trial, the 200+ k's on the road, just like a stage.
Hope he doesn't break the other collar bone in France though.The only disability in life is a poor attitude.0 -
-
RichN95 wrote:Mouth wrote:He'd be brave to try for them all IMO.
I think you may be right.
One thing I think he may be aware of is that one more medal will make him the most 'medalled' (sorry) sportsman in British Olympic history (he's currently equal with Steve Redgrave)
Didn't realise the medals fact TBH. After a little research, me may have to fight Sir Chris though.
Cav hit the nail though in an interview before the Worlds. He said: (please allow me to paraphrase) "Riding Grand Tours and stage wins is my job, the Worlds is for pride". Then again, lets see if he gives up his Vuelta pay check.The only disability in life is a poor attitude.0 -
LeicesterLad wrote:Butterd2 wrote:I agree that I believe he will focus on the TdF. This is how Team Sky will resolve the Cav vs Brad issue (for 2012 at least). Wiggins will do TdF with a team there to support him, Cav may do the first week or so and try to blag a couple of stage wins without a lead out train, then pull out to focus on the Olympic RR.
Cav will obviously have interest in the Olympic Road Race, but i can't see him sacrificing the TdF, Stage wins in the Tour mean everything to cav, especially on the Champs Elysees. Anybody putting the Olympics ahead of the Tour needs a reality check if you as me, ok yes its in London, Home soil and all that etc etc, but lets face it, its crap. As previously stated on here, with alot of outside sports (ie, anything other than track and field) they send micky mouse teams and athletes anyway, yeah medals are great, but NOBODY took up ROAD cycling to win an olympic medal, they ALL took up road cycling with ambitions of winning a GT.
I don't doubt that would Cav would like to do both but I don't believe one team (even Sky) can properly support a GC contender and a Sprinter in the same tour. Can they really afford to put climbers on "Cav" duty in the mountains and still give Wiggins the support he would need?
Whilst I and most people on this board would take TdF wins over the Olympics I bet the majority of the British public would still put the Olympics first.
You could take the plan even further and say that having been given his big chance in 2012 TdF Wiggins then gets to play the Bernie Eisel role for Cav in the 2013 TdF?0 -
stfc1 wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:alot of other sports clearly are not that bothered by the olympics, such as the Football, Boxing, Tennis who send second rate sportsman to compete.
Football and boxing have been dealt with, so here is a list of gold medalists from the tennis tournament at the 2008 Olympics:
Men's Singles: Rafael Nadal
Women's Singles: Elena Dementieva
Men's Doubles: Roger Federer & Stanislas Wawrinka
Women's Doubles: Venus & Serena Williams
It'll be far better for the Olympics when tennis players take it seriously and stop sending the mickey mouse / second rate players to compete 0 -
Pross wrote:stfc1 wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:alot of other sports clearly are not that bothered by the olympics, such as the Football, Boxing, Tennis who send second rate sportsman to compete.
Football and boxing have been dealt with, so here is a list of gold medalists from the tennis tournament at the 2008 Olympics:
Men's Singles: Rafael Nadal
Women's Singles: Elena Dementieva
Men's Doubles: Roger Federer & Stanislas Wawrinka
Women's Doubles: Venus & Serena Williams
It'll be far better for the Olympics when tennis players take it seriously and stop sending the mickey mouse / second rate players to compete
Stanislas Wawrinka? Elena Dementieva? never heard of them two, but then again, tennis is proper sh*t. 0 -
Heavymental wrote:I'd say in cycling a tour or prestigious one dayer is bigger than Olympic gold. Just as in football, for the players, the Champions League is the bigger deal than the world cup. In rugby it is the world cup or, for me, the Lions Tour is the pinnacle for a British player.
Strongly disagree!! The World cup is larger than the Olympics or the Champions League. The World cup will remain the pinnacle of any footballers dream but by fate of birth, few can achieve this regardless of skill and talent. Hence for many, the Champions League is a more realistic but lesser prize. With respect to cycling, I can only see the Olympics as the career pinnacle for track riders and maybenow, BMX. Road will remain a Grand Tour or Monument one dayer.0 -
Top_Bhoy wrote:Heavymental wrote:I'd say in cycling a tour or prestigious one dayer is bigger than Olympic gold. Just as in football, for the players, the Champions League is the bigger deal than the world cup. In rugby it is the world cup or, for me, the Lions Tour is the pinnacle for a British player.
Strongly disagree!! The World cup is larger than the Olympics or the Champions League. The World cup will remain the pinnacle of any footballers dream but by fate of birth, few can achieve this regardless of skill and talent. Hence for many, the Champions League is a more realistic but lesser prize. With respect to cycling, I can only see the Olympics as the career pinnacle for track riders and maybenow, BMX. Road will remain a Grand Tour or Monument one dayer.
Fair enough. Poor example. I agree with your point... which is what I was trying to say really.
Although Carragher did say when England lost he didn't feel so bad as it wasn't Liverpool. But then, England got nowhere near troubling the business end of the tournament so I guess it's academic.0
