Cyclingnews TV News Tech Features Road MTB BMX Cyclo-cross Track Photos Fitness Letters Search Forum | ||||||||||||
|
Letters to Cyclingnews - September 18, 2008Here's your chance to get more involved with Cyclingnews. Comments and criticism on current stories, races, coverage and anything cycling related are welcomed, even pictures if you wish. Letters should be brief (less than 300 words), with the sender clearly identified. They may be edited for space and clarity; please stick to one topic per letter. We will normally include your name and place of residence, but not your email address unless you specify in the message. Please email your correspondence to letters@cyclingnews.com. Armstrong come back Armstrong come backTo say I am ambivalent about the impending return of Lance Armstrong to the ranks of professional cycling is an understatement. As an avid fan, I would be perfectly happy if he stayed at home in Texas. However, if he is coming back, and he has every right to ride as long as he follows the rules, I suggest that Team Astana is not the team he should ride for. Astana already has more accomplished Grand Tour GC riders than any other team. Putting Lance on this team would eliminate his primary competition before the race starts. I have great respect for Johan Bruyneel, but I find it hard to believe that he would not sacrifice the chances of Levi, Contador, Klöden and everyone else to make "history" once again. With Sastre going to a weaker team, Evans still saddled with limited support in the mountains and the Schleck brothers still years away from being ready, would this really be competing against the best? If they would have him, I suggest he ride with Columbia or CSC. Columbia is the winningest team in the world, has an anti-doping program second to none and has no real GC hopes on its roster. The fact that the sponsor is US based does not hurt either. Plus Lance gets to ride with his long time pal George Hincapie. If that won't fly, CSC is next best option. They are the strongest team in the world but just lost their true GC hope. They have the team structure to support a world class return the peloton. Best of all, Armstrong on either one of these teams, would set up an absolute must see Tour de France. Who could not be excited by the possibility of Contador/Levi/Bruyneel battling tooth and nail with the "Comeback" on the roads of France? Mike Giunta Friday, September 12, 2008 Armstrong come back #2I was interested to see your report that scientists were debating. Why? Science is a fact based exercise and there are no facts to test. Any discussion on the physicality of a cyclist only tells a small part of the story. A discussion on Armstrong's results needs to evaluate all of the factors that led to Armstrong's domination besides his weight loss and resulting increase in power to weight ratio, and his exceptional oxygen uptake. To analyse his results you must consider the extraordinary lengths he went to such as weighing every piece of his food intake, constantly measuring his power output, constantly phoning around to understand his opponents state of mind, the microscopic attention to detail with the bike and aerodynamics, a well-drilled and dedicated team, faultless tactics, not to mention his mental domination. The percentage difference in physical ability between the top men is small; Armstrong was intelligent enough to give himself the advantage not only by addressing all of the other factors, but focussing on those that were critical to winning - time trialling and climbing. These are the two most critical elements of the TdF, hence Armstrong's focus on power to weight and aerodynamics. Mind you, we could still pick holes in his TT technique, but I have seen few better in the pro peloton. It would do cycling a good service at this point in time for Cyclingnews to publish facts and not speculation, as someone else has just written, you are not a tabloid. By the way, I am neither an Armstrong supporter nor antagonist, just like to deal in facts and real evidence. John Saturday, September 13, 2008 Armstrong come back #3What a dreadful idea it is for Lance Armstrong to "return" to competitive racing. Quite apart from the obvious hostility he'll be facing from the peloton for upstaging younger riders on whatever team he signs with, he'll face as much or more from the European press over the doping issue and other matters; and for what? If he's sincere about returning to cycling to help fight cancer (rather than merely increasing the value of his endorsement contracts), he should instead train for the Race Across America (RAAM). Unlike overtly commercial races like the Tour, the RAAM is dominated by charitable teams. Armstrong's participation would massively raise the event's profile and promote competitive cycling in the U.S. Best of all, the record-holder for fastest cross-country time in the race is held by Pete Penseyres, who was 43 at the time. Armstrong would have several years to compete himself up to that level. Andrew Hirsch Saturday, September 13, 2008 Armstrong come back #4One can't help wondering if Lance Armstrong's return is driven in part by the commercial concerns of his sponsors and US tour organizers. The week before his announcement the Tour of Georgia announced financial difficulties and the likelihood of cancellation for 2009, yet Armstrong explicitly subsequently said it is one of the five races he will ride. I find it hard to believe that Lance is so mis-informed. Stephen Chenney Sunday, September 14, 2008 All round classificationIt is called the Combination Classification. The scoring is based upon your standing in the three classifications. GC, Mountains, and Points classification. Contadors' score is 3 for GC, 6 for points, and 5 for mountains, hence his score is 14. 3 + 6 + 5 = 14. Usually the winner of the GC wins this competition. I believe this is the second silliest competition in a bike race, trailing by a large margin the Giro competitions like the Expo Milano 2015, FUGA Cervelo, and Azurri D' Italia. Does anyone have a clue about these? David Thompson Thursday, September 11, 2008 Madiot's need to explain himself"Lance Armstrong has to explain himself about what happened in 1999," says Marc Madiot. Before pointing fingers, perhaps Madiot could explain his defence of drug cheats when he appeared on the French TV channel TFI on 21 November 1989, where his comment in respect of disclosures by Didier Garci of widespread drug use in the peloton was: "This is a typical comment from a guy who was never any good." Lauren Stuart Friday, September 12, 2008 Does doping work?"People want to see records broken, they want to see winners, and they want to see inhuman feats." Nope, I actually want to see a great competition between sportsmen. What I love seeing is a sportsman (or woman) giving the best performance of their lives, whether they win or not. Great moments in cycling in recent years? How about Voigt giving the stage to the climber he had shadowed up the climb? That is true class. There will always be a winner, I don’t give a damn about records, and I do not want to see inhuman feats. Cycling, at least in Europe and South America has always been a peoples sport. The fans could get close to the stars, chat, and get autographs. They could ride the same or similar gear, and ride the exactly the same roads and compare themselves to/pretend they are the pros. There are very few sports where this is possible. Personally I think that aiming for the US market is the worst thing that could happen to cycling as US sports are the antithesis of what cycling has always represented. The best thing that happened to cycling recently was the tightening of rules about equipment, sport should be about the athletes not the equipment. Kim Shearer Sunday, September 14, 2008 Does doping work? #2Who cares, can't we just drop this issue. It is really getting silly; if an athlete chooses to cheat it’s on his/her shoulders. I’m getting sick of people complaining about doping; let’s talk about cycling for once! Tom Ahlrichs Friday, September 12, 2008 Exciting racing!I don’t know about anyone else, but for me yesterday (Wed., Sept 11) had two of the most exciting/nail biting bike races in recent memory. First, the gapping of Valverde at the Vuelta and then the relentless attacks against Christian Vande Velde and his Garmin-Chipotle team by mostly Team Columbia at the Tour of Missouri. Wow; fantastic reporting by the Cyclingnews.com folks. Norman Davis Friday, September 12, 2008 Contador and the VueltaWell, what a crappy turn of events for the Tour. Today the hero of the Tour got handily beaten by both Contador and Leipheimer. It sort of diminishes Sastre's accomplishments in July. No disrespect meant! Sastre was the best of the field in the Tour, but we'll always wonder what could have been; I hate the ASO now! Manolo Oliveras Saturday, September 13, 2008 Lance on Astana?I think it would absolutely rock to have Lance ride with Alberto, Levi, Andreas and Chechu. It would force the hands of ASO a bit more to include the team next year, although hopefully there is some major outcry after Astana goes 1-2 in the Vuelta. It really taints Sastre's victory in my book. But the really exciting thought and ultimate pay back for excluding the team in '08 would be for them to sweep the podium in '09. They did 1-3 in '07 without Lance. Maybe that is more of the reason for ASO excluding them this year. It must irk them a bit that Johan has dominated the race for so long. Payback is sweet! Dirk Medema Monday, September 15, 2008 Say it isn’t So Lance!Sean Jones your letter was so ridiculous it should not even be dignified with a response. However I cannot help myself. Let me guess you are one of those people convinced that 911 was a government conspiracy. To think that the UCI or ASO would manufacture a positive doping test against Lance Armstrong is ludicrous. If they were to do this it would almost surly be the end of cycling as we know it. The magic and spirit of cycling which Lance has had a major hand in creating would be tarnished for life. It would be 100 times more damaging than any other cyclist doping scandal in history. To think that cycling's governing body's would deliberately do this to the sport that they love just as much as any other cyclist is crazy all to settle a score with someone who "Has beaten them at their own game". Jack Hudson Tuesday, September 16, 2008 ARD not looking forward to Armstrong return"The return of Armstrong is obviously not a credible action in the struggle for a future without doping," said Ganz. He explained that ASO is keen to have the commitment of German television due to the historically strong support of German riders at the Tour by the public back home. "Our word has weight. For the French, the German market is more important than many others," he added. I’m still waiting for definitive proof that Armstrong doped from credible sources rather than from a sensationalist newspaper. Sounds like someone is still bitter that the American dominated all the stars the German’s had to throw at him. Then it turns out their biggest star may have been the biggest offender. Pretty ironic… ASO, maybe it’s time to find another channel to support the Tour for German fans. If Armstrong does sign with Astana then he’ll go through the same rigorous testing everyone else on the team is going through above the usual testing. So detractors should embrace his return. The current state of testing should finally clear or bury Armstrong. Because of that both sides should be happy to see him coming back! From a business perspective, I’m sure behind closed doors the ASO is happy to see him back just for the increased viewer ratings they’ll reap. Gary Wednesday, September 17, 2008 ARD not looking forward to Armstrong return #2If I read the article titled ARD on Armstrong return correctly, we have a German TV network clearly stating that it will exert what it sees as its considerable influence on the TdF organizer, ASO, to preclude Lance Armstrong from starting in the 2009 TdF based on an adverse view the TV network has of Armstrong that is, at least in part, based on a story published in a French newspaper. I may be overly simplistic, but that is just plain wrong. I do not know whether Armstrong doped or not, but until he is proven, by a reliable process, to have doped I will assume he did not. He is entitled to hold an International Race Licence. He might be denied a start in the world’s largest professional bicycle race because an entity the organizer of the event hopes to have a commercial arrangement with has indicated it will dictate who is to start and who is not to start. This is the heart of the dispute between ASO and UCI last year. The riders and teams ought to have stood their ground with both UCI and ASO. It will be very interesting to see what ASO might do. I won’t be buying that BMW I was thinking of buying… Brian Glendenning Wednesday, September 17, 2008 Guilty by associationI’m sick of all the negativity surrounding the return of Lance Armstrong. Everyone seems to have an opinion, what a shame it seems to be whichever opinion has been handed to them recently by some other cynical disbeliever who never rode a bike. Lance Armstrong is the most drug tested athlete on the planet. Lance Armstrong never returned a positive drug test. So he’s innocent then? Apparently not! It seems that circumstantial evidence is enough to convict these days. Several top 10 riders in the Tour during the Armstrong years have since tested positive and that seems to be enough to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that LA must have doped too. Roberto Heras and Floyd Landis doped and that seems to be enough for everyone to suggest Lance as one time teammate must have doped too. Why are we not picking on George Hincapie too? Because he never won the Tour. David Millar is held up as a hero for speaking out against doping. Excuse me? Millar doped, got caught, cracked under police pressure and squealed. Lance’s return is not welcomed by the media who want to leave the ‘shady controversial Texan’ in the past. ‘This is not what the sport needs’ they say. Remind me again why? Because he dominated a bike race in an era when a bunch of other guys who raced him took drugs! Fair enough, but should we not also victimise everyone else who raced between 1999-05? I’m confused, this is the same sport that celebrates Tom Simpson each time a race climbs the Mont Ventoux right? Erm… perspective please? Bjarne Riis is fine to lead the CSC team to the Tour de France 2008 title from behind the wheel of the team car. Let’s see whether Saunier Duval get barred from participating in next year’s Tour in the wake of the Ricco affair. The cycling industry thrived on Lance Armstrong for years. More bikes got sold, more people watched races, more magazines got sold, TV deals got bigger, sponsors were attracted to the Sport. Today I read that German Television are going to tell ASO they are ‘not amused’ by Lance Armstrong’s comeback antics. Pardon me? Lance Armstrong may not be to everyone’s taste, but when will this end? When a hero to millions and an inspiration to millions more has been destroyed. When a cancer charity doing more to tackle the disease than any government has been reduced to ruin? Then all those people intent on victimising a legend can congratulate themselves for a job well done and really celebrate. Truth is, they’ll have accomplished nothing and the world will be worse off for their efforts. Now, surely these people have something more important to do than be part of a pointless witch hunt. Dave Shephard Wednesday, September 17, 2008 GarzelliCorrect me if I am wrong but why does there seem to be almost nothing written about Stefano Garzelli on your site? He just won the GP Wallone and there is barely a peep about him. He is one of the very few riders who is both competitive in the grand tours and regularly wins some rather substantial one-day races. On top of that, he is not exactly the youngest rider in the pack. It seems that he is one of the few old school riders left standing, er- pedaling. Assuming he is clean, he should get much more praise than he does. Cory Thompson Wednesday, September 17, 2008 Scott Spark project bikeHi Kevin and Graham, Thanks for the letters and both of you make valid points. However, I should probably clarify a few things: * We didnt post a total price for our Project Bike not because it would have been too expensive to mention, but rather because the nature of the frame-up build meant a real-world price was nearly impossible to quote. A shop would generally apply some sort of discount to a complete build like this and very few consumers would simply go out and purchase each of the components at full retail. When you consider that the new 09 Spark LTD retails for almost US$12,500 and its DT Swiss XRC 330 carbon rims alone cost about US$1,000 (our entire ZTR Race wheelset is only US$950), we dare say that our build is likely quite a bit less expensive when all is said and done. Our apologies for not clarifying that in the article text but even if this came out to US$7,000 (a veritable bargain in comparison), we agree its still an exorbitant amount of money to pay for something that will likely get slammed into the ground more than once in its lifetime. * Weight: Keep in mind that our quoted Project Bike weight also includes a bottle cage. Ok, at 30g, its not much but that brings the difference to more like 170g or so which, in weight weenie terms, is akin to jettisoning a boat anchor. Given that our bike would likely be cheaper, or at worst roughly the same cost, as the stock LTD, we think we did ok. Not to mention that the 630mm-wide riser bar is far more usable in the real world than the 600mm integrated flat bar that Scott specs on its LTD and our bikes saddle also uses more durable titanium rails instead of the stock LTDs carbon ones. Kevin, you in particular can probably imagine how either of those changes might affect your descending on the rock section at Hall Ranch! Ouch. * Tires: yup, those Schwalbes were certainly fragile where we tested them but to be fair, our environment is fairly extreme in the grand spectrum of trail terrain. Riders that dont have to deal with as many sharp rocks would likely fare reasonably well with these and these things would be as good as gold in the Midwest. As for the WTB Wolverines that we swapped to, we easily could have gone lighter and perhaps should have for this article. Our Wolverines were 570g apiece; Michelins XCR Dry2 (with which weve had excellent experiences) is only about 480g each. The smaller casing would have meant that we had to be a little more careful in picking lines and whatnot but they still probably would have been the better compromise overall and would have only added 100g to our build. * Cheesecake: Give up cheesecake? Blasphemy! We love cheesecake (boy, do we love cheesecake). But yes, omitting that and other such items would undoubtedly be more cost effective than going to such lengths to build what we did but it wasnt our intention to be economical. The purpose of our Project Bike was to see how light we could go on a bike without crossing that delicate line between weight and durability/performance. When you consider guys like Christophe Sauser uses aluminum brake caliper bolts (that are loaded in shear, no less) and World Cup-level DH racers run only three rotor bolts, theres clearly some interest out there for dropping grams. Would someone in the real world do a build like this? Though youre not likely to see scores of them at your local trail head this isnt far off from what others have already done and, if anything, is far less extreme than some examples weve researched. Either way, we agree that this Project Bike probably isnt terribly close to mimicking what many of you have to deal with (i.e. real budgets) so future ones will definitely be more cost and value oriented. If youve got an idea that youd like to see us explore, feel free to drop us a line at tech@cyclingnews.com. James Huang Saturday, September 13, 2008 Recent letters pagesLetters 2008
Letters 2007
|
|
|