have you seen this article? - Page 3

07-28-2004, 10:22 AM

"El Paisano" wrote:
> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]****okyo.att.ne.jp. ..
>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>In case you didn't read this article, this guy thinks cyclitsts are
>>not as athletic as football players. It just made me mad, figures i
>>would share it with as many as i could.
>>
>>
>>[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>
>>I know it won't mean anything, but i wrote him a letter.
>>
>>
>
> Depends on how you define athleticism. There are some downright stupid
> statements (Gretzky, Rodman, A-Rod, or Ricky Williams could win the Tour;
> misspelling of pedal; etc.) but I would have to agree that cyclists are not
> athletic in the sense that football (American) players are. The author gives
> some of his criteria: speed, agility, muscle, and ability to take a hit. If
> these are your criteria, then indeed, Ricky Williams (and every NFL running
> back) is a far better athlete than Armstrong.

But again I ask, can they do this 4-6 hours a day, every day, for 23
days, only 2 of them rest days?

American football players are NOT endurance athletes. You can't compare
an elite pro cyclist to them. Pro cyclists are more adequately compared
to marathon runners, cross-country skiers, long distance speed-skaters,
and the like.

-km

--
the black rose
proud to be owned by a yorkie
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

07-28-2004, 11:04 AM

"the black rose" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:k9SNc.68082$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com...
> "El Paisano" wrote:
> > <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]****okyo.att.ne.jp. ..
> >
> >>Hi all,
> >>
> >>In case you didn't read this article, this guy thinks cyclitsts are
> >>not as athletic as football players. It just made me mad, figures i
> >>would share it with as many as i could.
> >>
> >>
> >>[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
> >>
> >>I know it won't mean anything, but i wrote him a letter.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Depends on how you define athleticism. There are some downright stupid
> > statements (Gretzky, Rodman, A-Rod, or Ricky Williams could win the
Tour;
> > misspelling of pedal; etc.) but I would have to agree that cyclists are
not
> > athletic in the sense that football (American) players are. The author
gives
> > some of his criteria: speed, agility, muscle, and ability to take a hit.
If
> > these are your criteria, then indeed, Ricky Williams (and every NFL
running
> > back) is a far better athlete than Armstrong.
>
> But again I ask, can they do this 4-6 hours a day, every day, for 23
> days, only 2 of them rest days?
>
> American football players are NOT endurance athletes. You can't compare
> an elite pro cyclist to them. Pro cyclists are more adequately compared
> to marathon runners, cross-country skiers, long distance speed-skaters,
> and the like.
>
And that's the point. You have different criteria for "athletic." Using your
criteria, I can't argue that Williams is a better athlete than Armstrong,
and using the journalist's criteria I can't argue that Armstrong is a better
athlete than Williams.

At any rate, most knowledgeable people would not even call Armstrong the
greatest cyclist ever.

07-28-2004, 11:04 AM

"the black rose" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:k9SNc.68082$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com...
> "El Paisano" wrote:
> > <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]****okyo.att.ne.jp. ..
> >
> >>Hi all,
> >>
> >>In case you didn't read this article, this guy thinks cyclitsts are
> >>not as athletic as football players. It just made me mad, figures i
> >>would share it with as many as i could.
> >>
> >>
> >>[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
> >>
> >>I know it won't mean anything, but i wrote him a letter.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Depends on how you define athleticism. There are some downright stupid
> > statements (Gretzky, Rodman, A-Rod, or Ricky Williams could win the
Tour;
> > misspelling of pedal; etc.) but I would have to agree that cyclists are
not
> > athletic in the sense that football (American) players are. The author
gives
> > some of his criteria: speed, agility, muscle, and ability to take a hit.
If
> > these are your criteria, then indeed, Ricky Williams (and every NFL
running
> > back) is a far better athlete than Armstrong.
>
> But again I ask, can they do this 4-6 hours a day, every day, for 23
> days, only 2 of them rest days?
>
> American football players are NOT endurance athletes. You can't compare
> an elite pro cyclist to them. Pro cyclists are more adequately compared
> to marathon runners, cross-country skiers, long distance speed-skaters,
> and the like.
>
And that's the point. You have different criteria for "athletic." Using your
criteria, I can't argue that Williams is a better athlete than Armstrong,
and using the journalist's criteria I can't argue that Armstrong is a better
athlete than Williams.

At any rate, most knowledgeable people would not even call Armstrong the
greatest cyclist ever.

07-28-2004, 11:04 AM

"the black rose" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:k9SNc.68082$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com...
> "El Paisano" wrote:
> > <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]****okyo.att.ne.jp. ..
> >
> >>Hi all,
> >>
> >>In case you didn't read this article, this guy thinks cyclitsts are
> >>not as athletic as football players. It just made me mad, figures i
> >>would share it with as many as i could.
> >>
> >>
> >>[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
> >>
> >>I know it won't mean anything, but i wrote him a letter.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Depends on how you define athleticism. There are some downright stupid
> > statements (Gretzky, Rodman, A-Rod, or Ricky Williams could win the
Tour;
> > misspelling of pedal; etc.) but I would have to agree that cyclists are
not
> > athletic in the sense that football (American) players are. The author
gives
> > some of his criteria: speed, agility, muscle, and ability to take a hit.
If
> > these are your criteria, then indeed, Ricky Williams (and every NFL
running
> > back) is a far better athlete than Armstrong.
>
> But again I ask, can they do this 4-6 hours a day, every day, for 23
> days, only 2 of them rest days?
>
> American football players are NOT endurance athletes. You can't compare
> an elite pro cyclist to them. Pro cyclists are more adequately compared
> to marathon runners, cross-country skiers, long distance speed-skaters,
> and the like.
>
And that's the point. You have different criteria for "athletic." Using your
criteria, I can't argue that Williams is a better athlete than Armstrong,
and using the journalist's criteria I can't argue that Armstrong is a better
athlete than Williams.

At any rate, most knowledgeable people would not even call Armstrong the
greatest cyclist ever.

07-28-2004, 11:04 AM

"the black rose" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:k9SNc.68082$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com...
> "El Paisano" wrote:
> > <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]****okyo.att.ne.jp. ..
> >
> >>Hi all,
> >>
> >>In case you didn't read this article, this guy thinks cyclitsts are
> >>not as athletic as football players. It just made me mad, figures i
> >>would share it with as many as i could.
> >>
> >>
> >>[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
> >>
> >>I know it won't mean anything, but i wrote him a letter.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Depends on how you define athleticism. There are some downright stupid
> > statements (Gretzky, Rodman, A-Rod, or Ricky Williams could win the
Tour;
> > misspelling of pedal; etc.) but I would have to agree that cyclists are
not
> > athletic in the sense that football (American) players are. The author
gives
> > some of his criteria: speed, agility, muscle, and ability to take a hit.
If
> > these are your criteria, then indeed, Ricky Williams (and every NFL
running
> > back) is a far better athlete than Armstrong.
>
> But again I ask, can they do this 4-6 hours a day, every day, for 23
> days, only 2 of them rest days?
>
> American football players are NOT endurance athletes. You can't compare
> an elite pro cyclist to them. Pro cyclists are more adequately compared
> to marathon runners, cross-country skiers, long distance speed-skaters,
> and the like.
>
And that's the point. You have different criteria for "athletic." Using your
criteria, I can't argue that Williams is a better athlete than Armstrong,
and using the journalist's criteria I can't argue that Armstrong is a better
athlete than Williams.

At any rate, most knowledgeable people would not even call Armstrong the
greatest cyclist ever.

07-28-2004, 11:04 AM

"the black rose" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:k9SNc.68082$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com...
> "El Paisano" wrote:
> > <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]****okyo.att.ne.jp. ..
> >
> >>Hi all,
> >>
> >>In case you didn't read this article, this guy thinks cyclitsts are
> >>not as athletic as football players. It just made me mad, figures i
> >>would share it with as many as i could.
> >>
> >>
> >>[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
> >>
> >>I know it won't mean anything, but i wrote him a letter.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Depends on how you define athleticism. There are some downright stupid
> > statements (Gretzky, Rodman, A-Rod, or Ricky Williams could win the
Tour;
> > misspelling of pedal; etc.) but I would have to agree that cyclists are
not
> > athletic in the sense that football (American) players are. The author
gives
> > some of his criteria: speed, agility, muscle, and ability to take a hit.
If
> > these are your criteria, then indeed, Ricky Williams (and every NFL
running
> > back) is a far better athlete than Armstrong.
>
> But again I ask, can they do this 4-6 hours a day, every day, for 23
> days, only 2 of them rest days?
>
> American football players are NOT endurance athletes. You can't compare
> an elite pro cyclist to them. Pro cyclists are more adequately compared
> to marathon runners, cross-country skiers, long distance speed-skaters,
> and the like.
>
And that's the point. You have different criteria for "athletic." Using your
criteria, I can't argue that Williams is a better athlete than Armstrong,
and using the journalist's criteria I can't argue that Armstrong is a better
athlete than Williams.

At any rate, most knowledgeable people would not even call Armstrong the
greatest cyclist ever.

07-28-2004, 11:07 AM

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> "El Paisano" wrote:
>
> > Depends on how you define athleticism. There are some downright stupid
> > statements (Gretzky, Rodman, A-Rod, or Ricky Williams could win the
> > Tour; misspelling of pedal; etc.) but I would have to agree that
> > cyclists are not athletic in the sense that football (American)
> > players are. The author gives some of his criteria: speed, agility,
> > muscle, and ability to take a hit. If these are your criteria, then
> > indeed, Ricky Williams (and every NFL running back) is a far better
> > athlete than Armstrong.
>
> And by that definition a heavyweight boxer is probably more "athletic"
than
> a triathlete.
>
Indeed, but I imagine this journalist's ideal of an athlete would be a
lighter, quicker boxer.

07-28-2004, 11:07 AM

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> "El Paisano" wrote:
>
> > Depends on how you define athleticism. There are some downright stupid
> > statements (Gretzky, Rodman, A-Rod, or Ricky Williams could win the
> > Tour; misspelling of pedal; etc.) but I would have to agree that
> > cyclists are not athletic in the sense that football (American)
> > players are. The author gives some of his criteria: speed, agility,
> > muscle, and ability to take a hit. If these are your criteria, then
> > indeed, Ricky Williams (and every NFL running back) is a far better
> > athlete than Armstrong.
>
> And by that definition a heavyweight boxer is probably more "athletic"
than
> a triathlete.
>
Indeed, but I imagine this journalist's ideal of an athlete would be a
lighter, quicker boxer.

07-28-2004, 11:07 AM

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> "El Paisano" wrote:
>
> > Depends on how you define athleticism. There are some downright stupid
> > statements (Gretzky, Rodman, A-Rod, or Ricky Williams could win the
> > Tour; misspelling of pedal; etc.) but I would have to agree that
> > cyclists are not athletic in the sense that football (American)
> > players are. The author gives some of his criteria: speed, agility,
> > muscle, and ability to take a hit. If these are your criteria, then
> > indeed, Ricky Williams (and every NFL running back) is a far better
> > athlete than Armstrong.
>
> And by that definition a heavyweight boxer is probably more "athletic"
than
> a triathlete.
>
Indeed, but I imagine this journalist's ideal of an athlete would be a
lighter, quicker boxer.

07-28-2004, 11:07 AM

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> "El Paisano" wrote:
>
> > Depends on how you define athleticism. There are some downright stupid
> > statements (Gretzky, Rodman, A-Rod, or Ricky Williams could win the
> > Tour; misspelling of pedal; etc.) but I would have to agree that
> > cyclists are not athletic in the sense that football (American)
> > players are. The author gives some of his criteria: speed, agility,
> > muscle, and ability to take a hit. If these are your criteria, then
> > indeed, Ricky Williams (and every NFL running back) is a far better
> > athlete than Armstrong.
>
> And by that definition a heavyweight boxer is probably more "athletic"
than
> a triathlete.
>
Indeed, but I imagine this journalist's ideal of an athlete would be a
lighter, quicker boxer.