Xavier wrote:
so by your logic if tom boonen trains more than lance armstrong hes gonna win the tour? lol
why not? he obviously has the strength in his legs to go over mountains. If he was to concentrate on training in mountains why couldn't he become a world class climber? he would loose his sprinting ability but you don't need that to win the tour.
so why did he become a sprinter/rider for the classics if he could win the tour?
because he knows he lacks the talent for climbing, body type, mentality, discipline, recuperation, team etc.. because he doesnt have the characteristics of a good climber/GC rider
if we were to race eachother, you and me, and we trained as much prior to the race, one of us would be faster than the other, because one of us has more talent/feel/body/whatever or the conditions of the race suit one better than the other
Edited by Xavier on 26-02-2009 16:38
Xavier wrote:
so by your logic if tom boonen trains more than lance armstrong hes gonna win the tour? lol
why not? he obviously has the strength in his legs to go over mountains. If he was to concentrate on training in mountains why couldn't he become a world class climber? he would loose his sprinting ability but you don't need that to win the tour.
Macquet wrote:
"We all know that wasn't the real footage of the Worlds anyway. That was just the staged footage to perpetuate the coverup that it was actually Vinokourov that won the race."
Xavier wrote:
so by your logic if tom boonen trains more than lance armstrong hes gonna win the tour? lol
why not? he obviously has the strength in his legs to go over mountains. If he was to concentrate on training in mountains why couldn't he become a world class climber? he would loose his sprinting ability but you don't need that to win the tour.
so why did he become a sprinter/rider for the classics if he could win the tour?
because he knows he lacks the talent for climbing, body type, mentality, discipline, recuperation, team etc.. because he doesnt have the characteristics of a good climber/GC rider
if we were to race eachother, you and me, and we trained as much prior to the race, one of us would be faster than the other, because one of us has more talent/feel/body/whatever or the conditions of the race suit one better than the other
because boonen was brought up in belgium where there are no hills or mountains! ever wondered why the best climbers come from countries with mountain ranges.
now boonen is a classics rider he is stuck as one. if he turned round to quickstep and said i want to train in the mountains all next year they would turn round and say "no, were paying you money to win classics not stage races". but who's to say if he was to train in the mountains for a year he couldn't become a good mountain rider? look at indurain, he was a big guy, look at Ullrich, look at Voigt. all big guys good in the mountains because they trainrd there!
and yes, but thats just down to our physicall build. you might be faster on the flat but i'd beat you on the hills. we'd be the same in terms of overall ability.
Xavier wrote:
so by your logic if tom boonen trains more than lance armstrong hes gonna win the tour? lol
why not? he obviously has the strength in his legs to go over mountains. If he was to concentrate on training in mountains why couldn't he become a world class climber? he would loose his sprinting ability but you don't need that to win the tour.
so why did he become a sprinter/rider for the classics if he could win the tour?
because he knows he lacks the talent for climbing, body type, mentality, discipline, recuperation, team etc.. because he doesnt have the characteristics of a good climber/GC rider
if we were to race eachother, you and me, and we trained as much prior to the race, one of us would be faster than the other, because one of us has more talent/feel/body/whatever or the conditions of the race suit one better than the other
because boonen was brought up in belgium where there are no hills or mountains! ever wondered why the best climbers come from countries with mountain ranges.
now boonen is a classics rider he is stuck as one. if he turned round to quickstep and said i want to train in the mountains all next year they would turn round and say "no, were paying you money to win classics not stage races". but who's to say if he was to train in the mountains for a year he couldn't become a good mountain rider? look at indurain, he was a big guy, look at Ullrich, look at Voigt. all big guys good in the mountains because they trainrd there!
and yes, but thats just down to our physicall build. you might be faster on the flat but i'd beat you on the hills. we'd be the same in terms of overall ability.
That's such a load of bullcrap.
Robert Gesink comes from the flat lands in Gelderland (the Netherlands). He's a climber.
Thomas Dekker comes from the polders in Northern Holland (regio Amsterdam, no hills or mountains there), he is a gc-rider
Jurgen van den Broeck, also a Belgian who comes from flat lands, 5th in the Giro last year (not counting Sella and Ricco the dopers).
So wtf are you talking about? These guys never trained on mountains in their youth and they turned out to be good climbers the minute they first climbed. It's a gift, a talent!!!! Sure you can train to improve a skill, but you can't just train your way from being a sprinter to being a climber, you need to have some talent or natural ability to do so!
everyones laughing but no-ones said anything comprehensive that will prove me wrong. i've had an answer for everything so far.
and why are people getting personal? this is a forum where opinions can be expressed. i've got an opinion and so far no one's proved otherwise, who's the real idiot t-baum? me with a full arguement or someone who's only contribution is 4 words with no point at all.
ringo182 wrote:
everyones laughing but no-ones said anything comprehensive that will prove me wrong. i've had an answer for everything so far.
and why are people getting personal? this is a forum where opinions can be expressed. i've got an opinion and so far no one's proved otherwise, who's the real idiot t-baum? me with a full arguement or someone who's only contribution is 4 words with no point at all.
I've read the responses to your opinion and I've read in one of them something that basically destroys your theory. People are naturally limited. You seem to assume they are not.
People have physical limits, xavier explained that.
And that is the answer to why a rider such as Boonen can't win the tour. Their physical limits would well, limit them
There's no point slapping a schleck - Sean Kelly on "Who needs a slap"
Xavier wrote:
so by your logic if tom boonen trains more than lance armstrong hes gonna win the tour? lol
why not? he obviously has the strength in his legs to go over mountains. If he was to concentrate on training in mountains why couldn't he become a world class climber? he would loose his sprinting ability but you don't need that to win the tour.
so why did he become a sprinter/rider for the classics if he could win the tour?
because he knows he lacks the talent for climbing, body type, mentality, discipline, recuperation, team etc.. because he doesnt have the characteristics of a good climber/GC rider
if we were to race eachother, you and me, and we trained as much prior to the race, one of us would be faster than the other, because one of us has more talent/feel/body/whatever or the conditions of the race suit one better than the other
because boonen was brought up in belgium where there are no hills or mountains! ever wondered why the best climbers come from countries with mountain ranges.
now boonen is a classics rider he is stuck as one. if he turned round to quickstep and said i want to train in the mountains all next year they would turn round and say "no, were paying you money to win classics not stage races". but who's to say if he was to train in the mountains for a year he couldn't become a good mountain rider? look at indurain, he was a big guy, look at Ullrich, look at Voigt. all big guys good in the mountains because they trainrd there!
and yes, but thats just down to our physicall build. you might be faster on the flat but i'd beat you on the hills. we'd be the same in terms of overall ability.
That's such a load of bullcrap.
Robert Gesink comes from the flat lands in Gelderland (the Netherlands). He's a climber.
Thomas Dekker comes from the polders in Northern Holland (regio Amsterdam, no hills or mountains there), he is a gc-rider
Jurgen van den Broeck, also a Belgian who comes from flat lands, 5th in the Giro last year (not counting Sella and Ricco the dopers).
So wtf are you talking about? These guys never trained on mountains in their youth and they turned out to be good climbers the minute they first climbed. It's a gift, a talent!!!! Sure you can train to improve a skill, but you can't just train your way from being a sprinter to being a climber, you need to have some talent or natural ability to do so!
it is possible to train in mountains even if you live in the lowlands, they're called training camps. it's also possible to be good in the mountains by just being powerful (Ullrich, Indurain, Voigt) so you can't really prove anything conclusive by saying Dekker and Gessink are good climbers.
As for converting a sprinter to a climber. Whats stopping Cavendish becoming a good 1 day classics rider? he's got the power to get up short sharp climbs, if he trained at it why couldn't he win the Amstel gold or Liege-bastogne-liege?
do you ever wonder why cancellara is a better tter than lazlo bodrogi even though it's pretty much bodrogis only specialisation yet the swissassin also rides the classics to win? natural ability
Xavier wrote:
so by your logic if tom boonen trains more than lance armstrong hes gonna win the tour? lol
why not? he obviously has the strength in his legs to go over mountains. If he was to concentrate on training in mountains why couldn't he become a world class climber? he would loose his sprinting ability but you don't need that to win the tour.
so why did he become a sprinter/rider for the classics if he could win the tour?
because he knows he lacks the talent for climbing, body type, mentality, discipline, recuperation, team etc.. because he doesnt have the characteristics of a good climber/GC rider
if we were to race eachother, you and me, and we trained as much prior to the race, one of us would be faster than the other, because one of us has more talent/feel/body/whatever or the conditions of the race suit one better than the other
because boonen was brought up in belgium where there are no hills or mountains! ever wondered why the best climbers come from countries with mountain ranges.
now boonen is a classics rider he is stuck as one. if he turned round to quickstep and said i want to train in the mountains all next year they would turn round and say "no, were paying you money to win classics not stage races". but who's to say if he was to train in the mountains for a year he couldn't become a good mountain rider? look at indurain, he was a big guy, look at Ullrich, look at Voigt. all big guys good in the mountains because they trainrd there!
and yes, but thats just down to our physicall build. you might be faster on the flat but i'd beat you on the hills. we'd be the same in terms of overall ability.
That's such a load of bullcrap.
Robert Gesink comes from the flat lands in Gelderland (the Netherlands). He's a climber.
Thomas Dekker comes from the polders in Northern Holland (regio Amsterdam, no hills or mountains there), he is a gc-rider
Jurgen van den Broeck, also a Belgian who comes from flat lands, 5th in the Giro last year (not counting Sella and Ricco the dopers).
So wtf are you talking about? These guys never trained on mountains in their youth and they turned out to be good climbers the minute they first climbed. It's a gift, a talent!!!! Sure you can train to improve a skill, but you can't just train your way from being a sprinter to being a climber, you need to have some talent or natural ability to do so!
it is possible to train in mountains even if you live in the lowlands, they're called training camps. it's also possible to be good in the mountains by just being powerful (Ullrich, Indurain, Voigt) so you can't really prove anything conclusive by saying Dekker and Gessink are good climbers.
As for converting a sprinter to a climber. Whats stopping Cavendish becoming a good 1 day classics rider? he's got the power to get up short sharp climbs, if he trained at it why couldn't he win the Amstel gold or Liege-bastogne-liege?
Hello!???
I have followed Thomas Dekkers career from close since his junior period. They didn't have training camps in any mountains. In fact the only climbing you can do in Holland is the hills in Limburg. And that's different the any real climb. You just won't accept the fact that there is such thing as talent as natural ability. If it was trainable to become a godlike climber, we would have had much more climbers/tour winners.
Do you really believe in the crap that Armstrong trained harder then everyone and therefore became 7 times tour winner? You should never believe such nonsense. Every top rider trains just as hard, or maybe even harder. Michael Boogerd was a freak in training, he trained much longer and harder on hills and mountains then Rebellin, Bettini and Di Luca put together, and he still lost to them.
Why? Because they had more TALENT. Goddamn you are ignorant.
doddy13 wrote:
People have physical limits, xavier explained that.
And that is the answer to why a rider such as Boonen can't win the tour. Their physical limits would well, limit them
but who's to say what those limits are? has boonen ever tried to better his climbing abilities? prob not so how does he know. how do you know when anyone has truely reached their limit? fitness improves in levels, it's not a contiueous rise. what might be seen as the limit could just be a plateau.
all i'm saying is why can't one skill be transfered into another?
