Lance & age

I don't know about anyone else, but sometimes you just have those days, sometimes a few in a row,
where you just can't make the bike do what you want. I know Lance was trying to peak for the Tour,
but that is not as easy to do as Chris Carmichael makes it sound.

Lance may hit his stride this coming week, but it will still not be a "blowout" like some of the
previous tours. One of the things Lance seems to have brought to the Tour is the realization that to
win you need your main contender to focus on the Tour from the beginning of the season. We seem to
see a lot more riders doing this than before. Hamilton, Leipheimer, Gonzalez, and Santiago are just
a few exmaples - though it didn't work for some of them. I truly believe this is why the race is
more competitive this year.

In all Lance's age probably impacts the ability to recover day to day more than anything. One thing
about getting older is that the muscles don't seem to feel the same the day after hard exertion as
they did a few years ago.

"Darren S." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Whenever Lance's performance in this years TdF is talked about, many

posters

Quoted message said:

to this fine NG seem to be very quick to attribute it to age related decline. Why is this? All
other factors being equal, could the passage of

a

Quoted message said:

single year really have taken him from the absolute dominance of last year to having to ride
Indurain style defensively up L'Alpe against Beloki this year? I have a very difficult time
believing that.

He may be a tad bit slower due to advancing age, but, unlike many people

it

Quoted message said:

seems, I can't believe thats the only thing going on with him this year.

Do

Quoted message said:

people really think the intestinal virus stuff was just psyops?

I suppose we'll see over the 96 hours beginning friday. If it was the intestinal crud he'll be
riding into form and becoming more like the Lance of yesteryear. If it really is the years, one
would presume that he'll not have any form to regain.

Cheers, Darren

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (grisoft.comgrisoft.comOpen ↗).
Version: 6.0.500 / Virus Database: 298 - Release Date: 7/10/2003

Who was the runner who broke the marathon world record (not age group) and got a gold?? He was
around 40!! Age has a bunch to do with it, but desire and hunger factors in more when you have
the tools ...

Carlos Lopes ... after a quick internet search ... age 37 olympic gold ...and the 10,000 WR not the
marathon ...

s boardnbike.comboardnbike.comOpen ↗

"Darren S." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Whenever Lance's performance in this years TdF is talked about, many

posters

Quoted message said:

to this fine NG seem to be very quick to attribute it to age related decline. Why is this? All
other factors being equal, could the passage of

a

Quoted message said:

single year really have taken him from the absolute dominance of last year to having to ride
Indurain style defensively up L'Alpe against Beloki this year?

I've been fielding calls from various journalists (thanks (??), Sam) wanting to know "what makes
Armstrong so special?" from a physiological perspective. What these reporters (and many fans) fail
to realize is that there really *isn't* anything that sets him distinctly apart from any other GC
contender. That is, in elite-level sports the difference between winners and the also-rans is often
only around 1%. Cycling is no exception (which is why multi-day stage races are needed to truly
separate the wheat from the chaffe against the randomness imposed by drafting, luck, etc.), and
Armstrong is (or has been) merely the creme de le creme de le creme. A 1% decline in Armstrong's
abilities from 2002 to 2003 due to normal aging could therefore most certainly make him suddenly
appear vulnerable.

Andy Coggan

In article <[email hidden]>, Andy Coggan

Quoted message said:

"Darren S." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Whenever Lance's performance in this years TdF is talked about, many

posters

Quoted message said:

to this fine NG seem to be very quick to attribute it to age related decline. Why is this? All
other factors being equal, could the passage of

a

Quoted message said:

single year really have taken him from the absolute dominance of last year to having to ride
Indurain style defensively up L'Alpe against Beloki this year?

I've been fielding calls from various journalists (thanks (??), Sam) wanting to know "what makes
Armstrong so special?" from a physiological perspective. What these reporters (and many fans) fail
to realize is that there really *isn't* anything that sets him distinctly apart from any other GC
contender. That is, in elite-level sports the difference between winners and the also-rans is
often only around 1%. Cycling is no exception (which is why multi-day stage races are needed to
truly separate the wheat from the chaffe against the randomness imposed by drafting, luck, etc.),
and Armstrong is (or has been) merely the creme de le creme de le creme. A 1% decline in
Armstrong's abilities from 2002 to 2003 due to normal aging could therefore most certainly make
him suddenly appear vulnerable.

Decreased desire and motivation, and outside distractions could also account for a small decline.

-WG

warren said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Andy Coggan

Quoted message said:

I've been fielding calls from various journalists (thanks (??), Sam) wanting to know "what makes
Armstrong so special?" from a physiological perspective. What these reporters (and many fans) fail
to realize is that there really *isn't* anything that sets him distinctly apart from any other GC
contender. That is, in elite-level sports the difference between winners and the also-rans is
often only around 1%. Cycling is no exception (which is why multi-day stage races are needed to
truly separate the wheat from the chaffe against the randomness imposed by drafting, luck, etc.),
and Armstrong is (or has been) merely the creme de le creme de le creme. A 1% decline in
Armstrong's abilities from 2002 to 2003 due to normal aging could therefore most certainly make
him suddenly appear vulnerable.

Decreased desire and motivation, and outside distractions could also account for a small decline.

-WG

And hasn't LANCE benefitted from "perfect" pre-season preparation until this year? IIRC, 2001/2 were
very clean for him, no illness, no crashes. That takes a measure of luck. Whereas this year, he fell
in the Dauphine(?) and had a minor virus.

Carmicheal says LANCE told him he feels great now, so we'll see in the next few days.

--
--
Lynn Wallace xmission.com~lawallOpen ↗ "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we
could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in
charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

"Darren S." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

All other factors being equal, could the passage of a single year really have taken him from the
absolute dominance of last year to having to ride Indurain style defensively up L'Alpe against
Beloki this year?

Yes.

Quoted message said:

I have a very difficult time believing that.

I don't see why. That is how aging works. The passage of a single year can be the difference between
being alive or dead.

Deez

smiles said:

Who was the runner who broke the marathon world record (not age group) and got a gold?? He was
around 40!! Age has a bunch to do with it, but desire and hunger factors in more when you have the
tools ...

Carlos Lopes ... after a quick internet search ... age 37 olympic gold ...and the 10,000 WR not
the marathon ...

Apart from those details, your story was pretty accurate...

All of this "age" discussion will end tomorrow.

In the prologue, Lance's time losses were primarily in the beginning of the stage, and that's not
relevent in a long time trial. Then, on L'Alpe, reports I've seen indicate he was riding a
conservative race, that he appeared at ease. He obviously decided the race would be decided in the
Pyrannes. He's had bad days before, and in the extraordinary heat is riding a tactical race to avoid
that from happening.

Ekimov has declared Armstrong is strong. Ekimov isn't one to talk trash.

Armstrong was dominant in the time trial in Dauphine. He's ridden a reserved race so far, and even
took a shortcut 🙂. Expect a win tomorrow. Ullrich second. Hamilton third.

Dan

"Raptor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

warren said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Andy Coggan

Quoted message said:

I've been fielding calls from various journalists (thanks (??), Sam)

wanting

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

to know "what makes Armstrong so special?" from a physiological

perspective.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What these reporters (and many fans) fail to realize is that there

really

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

*isn't* anything that sets him distinctly apart from any other GC

contender.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That is, in elite-level sports the difference between winners and the also-rans is often only
around 1%. Cycling is no exception (which is why multi-day stage races are needed to truly
separate the wheat from the

chaffe

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

against the randomness imposed by drafting, luck, etc.), and Armstrong

is

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(or has been) merely the creme de le creme de le creme. A 1% decline in Armstrong's abilities
from 2002 to 2003 due to normal aging could

therefore

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

most certainly make him suddenly appear vulnerable.

Decreased desire and motivation, and outside distractions could also account for a small
decline.

-WG

And hasn't LANCE benefitted from "perfect" pre-season preparation until this year?

My point was simply that, in elite sport, a 1% decline in performance - whether due to aging or some
other factor - would appear to be a sudden and precipitous drop-off.

Andy Coggan

"Daniel Connelly" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

All of this "age" discussion will end tomorrow.

Think so?

Andy Coggan

I think www-tcad.stanford.eduITT1.pdfOpen ↗ suggests that the ITT suggested
Ullrich is stronger, not Lance is weaker, than 2002.

Dan

Andy Coggan said:

"Daniel Connelly" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

All of this "age" discussion will end tomorrow.

Think so?

Andy Coggan

Daniel Connelly said:

I think www-tcad.stanford.eduITT1.pdfOpen ↗ suggests that the ITT suggested
Ullrich is stronger, not Lance is weaker, than 2002.

Dan

Correction -- Ullrich wasn't in the race in 2002. It was Botero who was first in the first ITT.....
my point is basically that Ullrich2003 >> Botero2002, not Lance2002 >> Lance2003.

Dan

But Armstrong's times up L'Alpe de Huez suggest otherwise...and I would submit that comparing a
rider to themselves on a long or steep uphill is a pretty good test of fitness.

Andy Coggan

"Daniel Connelly" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I think www-tcad.stanford.eduITT1.pdfOpen ↗ suggests that the ITT suggested
Ullrich is stronger, not Lance is weaker, than

2002.

Quoted message said:

Dan

Andy Coggan said:

"Daniel Connelly" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

All of this "age" discussion will end tomorrow.

Think so?

Andy Coggan

I agree with you Andy and that has me concerned if you follow me.

"Andy Coggan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

But Armstrong's times up L'Alpe de Huez suggest otherwise...and I

would

Quoted message said:

submit that comparing a rider to themselves on a long or steep

uphill is a

Quoted message said:

pretty good test of fitness.

Andy Coggan

"Daniel Connelly" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I think www-tcad.stanford.eduITT1.pdfOpen ↗

suggests

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that the ITT suggested Ullrich is stronger, not Lance is weaker,

than

Quoted message said:

2002.

Quoted message said:

Dan

Andy Coggan said:

"Daniel Connelly" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

>All of this "age" discussion will end tomorrow.

Think so?

Andy Coggan

By the L'Alpe metric, Ullrich is also suffering from old age, then, as his time was substantially
lower than either 2001 (IIRC) or 1997.

L'Alpe seemed to me a case of Armstrong marking what he perceived to be his rivals at the end of a
long, hot stage. Times in general were slow that day.

Maybe Armstrong is slower this year. I just don't think the race has clearly demonstrated it yet.

Dan

Tom Kunich said:

I agree with you Andy and that has me concerned if you follow me.

"Andy Coggan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

But Armstrong's times up L'Alpe de Huez suggest otherwise...and I

would

Quoted message said:

submit that comparing a rider to themselves on a long or steep

uphill is a

Quoted message said:

pretty good test of fitness.

Andy Coggan