Lance goes for Seven - Page 4 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

02-12-2005, 09:54 AM

Just zis Guy, you know? <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:45:02 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:
>
>>Wow....they keep changing the rules to prevent Lance from winning.
>
> Or maybe to make life a little fairer for those who do more than one
> race per season. How do you think Lance would fare against Eddie
> Mercx, with the same racing schedule?
>
> Guy

Don't know. However, if Lance did more races he might be even better.

02-12-2005, 12:12 PM

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 13:54:33 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

>>>Wow....they keep changing the rules to prevent Lance from winning.

>> Or maybe to make life a little fairer for those who do more than one
>> race per season. How do you think Lance would fare against Eddie
>> Mercx, with the same racing schedule?

>Don't know. However, if Lance did more races he might be even better.

He might indeed - we'll find out in a few months. My guess is that he
would be worse, since if races were the perfect training for the Tour
you can bet your ass that he would be racing.

I have nothing against Lance, and I'm looking forward to seeing him
riding the cobbles in Flanders, but I still think that Mercx was the
greatest cyclist ever.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

02-12-2005, 12:12 PM

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 13:54:33 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

>>>Wow....they keep changing the rules to prevent Lance from winning.

>> Or maybe to make life a little fairer for those who do more than one
>> race per season. How do you think Lance would fare against Eddie
>> Mercx, with the same racing schedule?

>Don't know. However, if Lance did more races he might be even better.

He might indeed - we'll find out in a few months. My guess is that he
would be worse, since if races were the perfect training for the Tour
you can bet your ass that he would be racing.

I have nothing against Lance, and I'm looking forward to seeing him
riding the cobbles in Flanders, but I still think that Mercx was the
greatest cyclist ever.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

02-12-2005, 01:06 PM

Just zis Guy, you know? <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 13:54:33 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:
>
>>>>Wow....they keep changing the rules to prevent Lance from winning.
>
>>> Or maybe to make life a little fairer for those who do more than one
>>> race per season. How do you think Lance would fare against Eddie
>>> Mercx, with the same racing schedule?
>
>>Don't know. However, if Lance did more races he might be even better.
>
> He might indeed - we'll find out in a few months. My guess is that he
> would be worse, since if races were the perfect training for the Tour
> you can bet your ass that he would be racing.
>
> I have nothing against Lance, and I'm looking forward to seeing him
> riding the cobbles in Flanders, but I still think that Mercx was the
> greatest cyclist ever.

May very well be. However, for me, Lance is the deal. I wasn't even
cycling aware until the last year or so.

02-12-2005, 01:06 PM

Just zis Guy, you know? <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 13:54:33 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:
>
>>>>Wow....they keep changing the rules to prevent Lance from winning.
>
>>> Or maybe to make life a little fairer for those who do more than one
>>> race per season. How do you think Lance would fare against Eddie
>>> Mercx, with the same racing schedule?
>
>>Don't know. However, if Lance did more races he might be even better.
>
> He might indeed - we'll find out in a few months. My guess is that he
> would be worse, since if races were the perfect training for the Tour
> you can bet your ass that he would be racing.
>
> I have nothing against Lance, and I'm looking forward to seeing him
> riding the cobbles in Flanders, but I still think that Mercx was the
> greatest cyclist ever.

May very well be. However, for me, Lance is the deal. I wasn't even
cycling aware until the last year or so.

02-12-2005, 01:34 PM

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:45:02 -0500, "Roger Zoul"

> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:
>
>> Wow....they keep changing the rules to prevent Lance from winning.
>
> Or maybe to make life a little fairer for those who do more than one
> race per season. How do you think Lance would fare against Eddie
> Mercx, with the same racing schedule?

I think the level of performance required to win any major event has increased
so much since Eddie's day that no one can sustain it over a whole season.

Matt O.

02-12-2005, 01:34 PM

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:45:02 -0500, "Roger Zoul"

> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:
>
>> Wow....they keep changing the rules to prevent Lance from winning.
>
> Or maybe to make life a little fairer for those who do more than one
> race per season. How do you think Lance would fare against Eddie
> Mercx, with the same racing schedule?

I think the level of performance required to win any major event has increased
so much since Eddie's day that no one can sustain it over a whole season.

Matt O.

02-12-2005, 01:45 PM

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 17:34:57 -0500, "Matt O'Toole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote in message <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

>I think the level of performance required to win any major event has increased
>so much since Eddie's day that no one can sustain it over a whole season.

Which is chicken, though, and which is egg?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

02-12-2005, 01:45 PM

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 17:34:57 -0500, "Matt O'Toole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote in message <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

>I think the level of performance required to win any major event has increased
>so much since Eddie's day that no one can sustain it over a whole season.

Which is chicken, though, and which is egg?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

02-12-2005, 02:52 PM

b_baka wrote:
> Bob wrote:
> > jj wrote:
> >
> >>You heard it here first! (as told to Oprah, 2/11/05)
> >>
> >>jj
> >
> >
> > This is hardly news. News would be if he announced that he WON'T
try
> > for seven. I mean, name even *one* world class athlete that has
ever
> > quit while still at the top of their sport. That just doesn't
happen.
> > The same overriding need to be "Number 1" that drives those at the
very
> > top of their field, athletic or otherwise, makes voluntarily
walking
> > away while at their peak virtually impossible for them.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bob Hunt
> >
> Bob,
> Michael Jordan! Gotcha.
> And Lance did say he will have a lot of time on his hands in a few
years
> so I am betting on this year. If he doesn't nail it this year he may
try
> one more time and then retire.
> Bill Baka

Bill,
You must define "peak" differently than I do because I was actually
thinking of the NBA's Michael Jordan when I wrote my post. Even he
would admit that he was at least two seasons past his peak the *first*
time he retired. He discovered when he returned from his first
retirement that while he was still a "franchise player" he could no
longer dominate the game as he once did. Why? Because he was past his
peak or his peak was past. Take your pick. :-)
Regards,
Bob Hunt