issoisso wrote:
My comment wasn't aimed at you. You're right, people do have that tendency.

stuartmcstuart wrote:


It was 81 miles or 130km. Don't belittle my achievement, even if I got an hours break in the middle of the race

Actually, it was an achievement in the last two years, because they cut off about an 8 mile loop that was covered in tacks from the run in, only 73 miles. Understandably, nobody took it seriously after the restart, with many people cramping from standing still in the cold for an hour. Not a great day for British cycling at all.

I got lucky with only 1 tack puncture, but one guy who I overheard at the Feed station had 8! Mavic actually ran out of spare tubes and puncture repair kits: all 700 of them. I hope the person responsible is caught and made to pay for the thousands of pounds worth of damage they caused, but its not likely. Its a small wonder nobody was seriously hurt, or the case could be much more severe against them.

Its sad to see a local turn his back on the millions brought into the area by the race, as well as the money raised for charity, all because the road closure makes life inconvienient to get a Sunday paper for a few hours.

rjc_43 wrote:


1. He floats back claiming to post up to date testing on himself by top dawg tester Dan Caitlin. Lasts all of 1 set of data, that was changed at a later date. No one seems to bat an eyelid.
2. Is using cycling to further his political career.
3. "Events" occur at extremely fortunate timings that make other "events" look like the entire cycling scene is like wrestling - pre planned shit drama.
4. He believes that he'll actually win anything.
5. He looks like a complete and utter plonker on that "bling" bike of his, that only an american would think was in any way, shape, or form, cool.
6. He has the style of a category 4 rider who keeps getting the chain ring marks on the inside of his leg from pressing against the chain.
7. Believes he has the right to dictate what the peloton should do.
8. Has ego problems.
9. Is American.
10. Is no longer a young rider with the skills to ride fearlessly in a peloton.
11. "Inspires" (with popeyes spinach I feel) his riders to suddenly go from nothing to good again. (Popo crap last year, suddenly revitalised. Horner as old as they come, suddenly flying).

I can't think of anything else that annoys me right now, but I'll get back to you when it does.

KurtinSC wrote:


I'm curious about some of your reasons.

#2... political career? If Lance wanted to get into politics... this comeback isn't helping. Unless he wins the Tour (which nobody thinks will happen), people in the US have no clue what's happening in Cycling. If he won another Tour it might help... but that isn't happening. If politics was his goal, he would have been better served just to run for office in Texas... he'd probably win.

#4... he posted before the second stage with a climb that he was hoping to stay within 2 minutes of the leaders (finished 3 minutes back). He said before the race he was there to help Levi. While I can believe deep down he may still think he can win... he hasn't really said anything publicly that indicates he thinks he's in competition... at least not at the Giro. Is there something else he's said that makes you think otherwise?

#11... Popo had a down year... but finishing 3rd in Paris-Nice isn't being totally crappy either. Horner didn't drop all that much last year... when he went to the team you seem to think is a doping risk (Astana) from a team you seem to indicate was clean by your shot at Popo (Lotto). I don't think he's riding any better then he did helping Cadel Evans in the 2007 Tour. And even if you are right that those guys are doping up... do you really think Lance is the instigator more than Bruyneel?

rjc_43 wrote:
As much as I've made myself seem anti-American, I'm not. I give everyone a chance to make a good impression on me, it's just that the most prominant American's usually come across as complete twats. (Lance, Bush, to name just two). At the end of the day, if more people were slating Lance here, I'd probably go defend him, I just enjoy being Devils Advocate. I'm born to do it.

BenBarnes wrote:


If that is the case, then please stop treating all American forum members like ex-President Bush...

Thanks!

rjc_43 wrote:


Well, I treat forum members the way I believe they need to be treated. Some I like, some I don't. I'm a fickle human.

BenBarnes wrote:
Well sorry if I've done something to piss you off already in my short time here.

issoisso wrote:


You exist. That's enough for rj

rjc_43 wrote:
As much as I've made myself seem anti-American, I'm not. I give everyone a chance to make a good impression on me, it's just that the most prominant American's usually come across as complete twats. (Lance, Bush, to name just two). At the end of the day, if more people were slating Lance here, I'd probably go defend him, I just enjoy being Devils Advocate. I'm born to do it.

#2... political career? If Lance wanted to get into politics... this comeback isn't helping. Unless he wins the Tour (which nobody thinks will happen), people in the US have no clue what's happening in Cycling. If he won another Tour it might help... but that isn't happening. If politics was his goal, he would have been better served just to run for office in Texas... he'd probably win.

trueatfirstlight wrote:


It's been a rumor among certain political circles that Lance plans to run for Governor of Texas in the years to come, so this inference is not at all off-base, irrespective of whatever you may choose to believe his true motives are.

And if that rumor is true, then all of this press is doing nothing but good for a future term in office, strategically speaking. He's traipsing around the world, meeting with heads of state and discussing a policy agenda; he doesn't have to win the Tour to do any of that.

Lance, Arnold, Jessie 'The Body' Ventura, ...
Between them and filibuster, no wonder it takes so long to pass legislation.

Deadpool wrote:
I put the odds at around 2:1 that he runs at some point in the future. Texas governors never last any time (probably because they never secede for the US), and with his popularity he could win.

Trueatfirstlight said everything that needs to be said about how bad that would be, as he has a lot of experience dealing with politicians, because of where he is from.

trueatfirstlight wrote:


There are bad politicians all over the world, make no mistake about that. We just seem to consistently provide the rest of the free world with the most outrageous examples of them in recent memory.

trueatfirstlight wrote:
There are bad politicians all over the world, make no mistake about that. We just seem to consistently provide the rest of the free world with the most outrageous examples of them in recent memory.