naive tour question?

al said:

I've only followed the "tour" for the first time this year, somewhat
off and on last year, so I'm really not familiar with the nuances of
the competition.

But I am wondering, if a rider completes the race in the least amount
of time within the rules set forth by the organizers, why he would be
criticized as a cheat or over-rated or not to be taken seriously, as
some of the posts indicate here. Do those who suggest these things
harbour a personal resentment about the winner for some reason, or is
there some legitimate reason to question Mr. Armstrong's performance.

You aren't missing anything about bike racing. You are missing
the concept or familiarity with the Usenet troll. See here
for more info:

http://www.urban75.com/Mag/troll.html

Last2Know said:

You aren't missing anything about bike racing.

As I thought. Thank you for the insight. But I am still left to wonder
why some insist upon denigrating such an achievement.

Quoted message said:

You are missing
the concept or familiarity with the Usenet troll. See here
for more info:

http://www.urban75.com/Mag/troll.html

As to this comment, while admittedly somewhat informative, and I can
see why one may choose to interpret the original post in that manner,
it is not really very helpful, is it...

al said:

I've only followed the "tour" for the first time this year, somewhat
off and on last year, so I'm really not familiar with the nuances of
the competition.

But I am wondering, if a rider completes the race in the least amount
of time within the rules set forth by the organizers, why he would be
criticized as a cheat or over-rated or not to be taken seriously, as
some of the posts indicate here.

Quoted message said:

Do those who suggest these things
harbour a personal resentment about the winner for some reason,

Yes.

Quoted message said:

or is
there some legitimate reason to question Mr. Armstrong's performance.

No.

Quoted message said:

It would seem to me that since all riders are riding the same course,
under the same set of rules and circumstances that *any* winner
regardless of nationality deserves credit for such a great
accomplishment.

You are correct.

Quoted message said:

If not, would one of you mind enlightening me... as politely as
possible, given obvious limitations of course, s'il vous plait.

Your insight is already well beyond that of most of the regulars here.
Unfortunately, this is Usenet, an unmoderated discussion network with no
rules. It's mob law, and anyone with a chip on their shoulder can and
will try to get it off here. Usually anonymously. But it is balanced
out by a healthy number of rational individuals who have learned to take
the trolls in their stride and themselves represent some of the very
best aficianados of the sport. I know, though, that you'd never know it
from -some- of the posts here...

-Sonarrat.

al said:

I've only followed the "tour" for the first time this year, somewhat
off and on last year, so I'm really not familiar with the nuances of
the competition.

But I am wondering, if a rider completes the race in the least amount
of time within the rules set forth by the organizers, why he would be
criticized as a cheat or over-rated or not to be taken seriously, as
some of the posts indicate here. Do those who suggest these things
harbour a personal resentment about the winner for some reason, or is
there some legitimate reason to question Mr. Armstrong's performance.

It would seem to me that since all riders are riding the same course,
under the same set of rules and circumstances that *any* winner
regardless of nationality deserves credit for such a great
accomplishment.

If not, would one of you mind enlightening me... as politely as
possible, given obvious limitations of course, s'il vous plait.

In short:

- other greats won races besides the TdF. A little bit of looking around
here will show you more about this - just look at the messages of the
last two days ignoring everything with the word "helmet" in it.
- there are rumours that he dopes - but there's no evidence for that.
Opinions range from "everyone dopes, so get over it" to "many dope but
not LANCE" etc. Google this group for Lafferty and you will find a lot
about the allegations against LA.
- Idiotic uberpatriotic LANCE cheerleaders provoke a lot of that
negativity towards him, I doubt any of the more rational people in here
would seriously deny his enourmous achievements. While these people do
also content that LA is _not_ the best racer ever (there's some other
european dude mentioned frequently)

Ernst Noch said:

also content that LA is _not_ the best racer ever (there's some other
european dude mentioned frequently)

I would not know anything about "the best racer ever", given as I noted
earlier that I have not followed bike racing before this year, but I do
know, as must even the most casual observer, that winning as demanding
a competition as the tour must be, seven years in a row, is a special
achievement; one that I am not sure has been or could be rivaled in any
other competitive arena, with the exception of a future "tour" champion
winning more.

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

Quoted message said:

As I thought. Thank you for the insight. But I am still left to wonder
why some insist upon denigrating such an achievement.

People who are nothing themselves like to blame those who are for their
problems.

al said:

Last2Know said:

You aren't missing anything about bike racing.

As I thought. Thank you for the insight. But I am still left to wonder
why some insist upon denigrating such an achievement.

Quoted message said:

You are missing
the concept or familiarity with the Usenet troll. See here
for more info:

http://www.urban75.com/Mag/troll.html

As to this comment, while admittedly somewhat informative, and I can
see why one may choose to interpret the original post in that manner,
it is not really very helpful, is it...

Looking back at your original post in this thread (assuming
that is what you mean above by "the original post"😉, I see
that you bundled a bunch of slightly different questions
together: "why [Armstrong] would be
criticized as a cheat or over-rated or not to be taken
seriously, as some of the posts indicate here."

IMO, the people who post to the effect that they don't
take his achievement seriously or that his style of
winning was somehow cheating are mainly trolling.
People who think he is over-rated may sometimes be
trolling, and sometimes they are reacting to other
people who claim he is the greatest bike racer
of all time (while most experts, including
Armstrong himself, give that title to Eddy Merckx).
Some people also claim he is a cheat because they
believe the doping allegations against him.

Last2Know said:

al said:

I've only followed the "tour" for the first time this year, somewhat
off and on last year, so I'm really not familiar with the nuances of
the competition.

But I am wondering, if a rider completes the race in the least amount
of time within the rules set forth by the organizers, why he would be
criticized as a cheat or over-rated or not to be taken seriously, as
some of the posts indicate here. Do those who suggest these things
harbour a personal resentment about the winner for some reason, or is
there some legitimate reason to question Mr. Armstrong's performance.

You aren't missing anything about bike racing. You are missing
the concept or familiarity with the Usenet troll. See here
for more info:

http://www.urban75.com/Mag/troll.html

Here's another useful resource:
http://redwing.hutman.net/%7Emreed/
Bill C

Last2Know said:

Looking back at your original post in this thread (assuming
that is what you mean above by "the original post"😉, I see
that you bundled a bunch of slightly different questions
together:

Quoted message said:

IMO, the people who post to the effect that they don't
take his achievement seriously or that his style of
winning was somehow cheating are mainly trolling.

Yes, I see now what you were saying. It appears that I misconstrued
your intent in a moment of hypersensitivity (paranoia?!). Thank you
very much for elaborating.

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

Quoted message said:

I've only followed the "tour" for the first time this year, somewhat
off and on last year, so I'm really not familiar with the nuances of
the competition.

But I am wondering, if a rider completes the race in the least amount
of time within the rules set forth by the organizers, why he would be
criticized as a cheat or over-rated or not to be taken seriously, as
some of the posts indicate here.

You should know there is a lot of sarcasm constantly being sprinkled over
this newsgroup day in and day out. So don't pay much attention. It's good
for laughs...

Quoted message said:

Do those who suggest these things
harbour a personal resentment about the winner for some reason, or is
there some legitimate reason to question Mr. Armstrong's performance.

It would seem to me that since all riders are riding the same course,
under the same set of rules and circumstances that *any* winner
regardless of nationality deserves credit for such a great
accomplishment.

Lance is pretty much at Saint status by now. He's untouchable, so don't
worry about it.

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

Quoted message said:

I've only followed the "tour" for the first time this year, somewhat
off and on last year, so I'm really not familiar with the nuances of
the competition.

But I am wondering, if a rider completes the race in the least amount
of time within the rules set forth by the organizers, why he would be
criticized as a cheat or over-rated or not to be taken seriously, as
some of the posts indicate here.

You should know there is a lot of sarcasm constantly being sprinkled over
this newsgroup day in and day out. So don't pay much attention. It's good
for laughs...

Quoted message said:

Do those who suggest these things
harbour a personal resentment about the winner for some reason, or is
there some legitimate reason to question Mr. Armstrong's performance.

It would seem to me that since all riders are riding the same course,
under the same set of rules and circumstances that *any* winner
regardless of nationality deserves credit for such a great
accomplishment.

Lance is pretty much at Saint status by now. He's untouchable, so don't
worry about it.

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

Quoted message said:

I've only followed the "tour" for the first time this year, somewhat
off and on last year, so I'm really not familiar with the nuances of
the competition.

But I am wondering, if a rider completes the race in the least amount
of time within the rules set forth by the organizers, why he would be
criticized as a cheat or over-rated or not to be taken seriously, as
some of the posts indicate here.

You should know there is a lot of sarcasm constantly being sprinkled over
this newsgroup day in and day out. So don't pay much attention. It's good
for laughs...

Quoted message said:

Do those who suggest these things
harbour a personal resentment about the winner for some reason, or is
there some legitimate reason to question Mr. Armstrong's performance.

It would seem to me that since all riders are riding the same course,
under the same set of rules and circumstances that *any* winner
regardless of nationality deserves credit for such a great
accomplishment.

Lance is pretty much at Saint status by now. He's untouchable, so don't
worry about it.

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

Quoted message said:

I've only followed the "tour" for the first time this year, somewhat
off and on last year, so I'm really not familiar with the nuances of
the competition.

But I am wondering, if a rider completes the race in the least amount
of time within the rules set forth by the organizers, why he would be
criticized as a cheat or over-rated or not to be taken seriously, as
some of the posts indicate here.

You should know there is a lot of sarcasm constantly being sprinkled over
this newsgroup day in and day out. So don't pay much attention. It's good
for laughs...

Quoted message said:

Do those who suggest these things
harbour a personal resentment about the winner for some reason, or is
there some legitimate reason to question Mr. Armstrong's performance.

It would seem to me that since all riders are riding the same course,
under the same set of rules and circumstances that *any* winner
regardless of nationality deserves credit for such a great
accomplishment.

Lance is pretty much at Saint status by now. He's untouchable, so don't
worry about it.

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

Quoted message said:

I've only followed the "tour" for the first time this year, somewhat
off and on last year, so I'm really not familiar with the nuances of
the competition.

But I am wondering, if a rider completes the race in the least amount
of time within the rules set forth by the organizers, why he would be
criticized as a cheat or over-rated or not to be taken seriously, as
some of the posts indicate here.

You should know there is a lot of sarcasm constantly being sprinkled over
this newsgroup day in and day out. So don't pay much attention. It's good
for laughs...

Quoted message said:

Do those who suggest these things
harbour a personal resentment about the winner for some reason, or is
there some legitimate reason to question Mr. Armstrong's performance.

It would seem to me that since all riders are riding the same course,
under the same set of rules and circumstances that *any* winner
regardless of nationality deserves credit for such a great
accomplishment.

Lance is pretty much at Saint status by now. He's untouchable, so don't
worry about it.

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

Quoted message said:

I've only followed the "tour" for the first time this year, somewhat
off and on last year, so I'm really not familiar with the nuances of
the competition.

But I am wondering, if a rider completes the race in the least amount
of time within the rules set forth by the organizers, why he would be
criticized as a cheat or over-rated or not to be taken seriously, as
some of the posts indicate here.

You should know there is a lot of sarcasm constantly being sprinkled over
this newsgroup day in and day out. So don't pay much attention. It's good
for laughs...

Quoted message said:

Do those who suggest these things
harbour a personal resentment about the winner for some reason, or is
there some legitimate reason to question Mr. Armstrong's performance.

It would seem to me that since all riders are riding the same course,
under the same set of rules and circumstances that *any* winner
regardless of nationality deserves credit for such a great
accomplishment.

Lance is pretty much at Saint status by now. He's untouchable, so don't
worry about it.

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

Quoted message said:

I've only followed the "tour" for the first time this year, somewhat
off and on last year, so I'm really not familiar with the nuances of
the competition.

But I am wondering, if a rider completes the race in the least amount
of time within the rules set forth by the organizers, why he would be
criticized as a cheat or over-rated or not to be taken seriously, as
some of the posts indicate here.

You should know there is a lot of sarcasm constantly being sprinkled over
this newsgroup day in and day out. So don't pay much attention. It's good
for laughs...

Quoted message said:

Do those who suggest these things
harbour a personal resentment about the winner for some reason, or is
there some legitimate reason to question Mr. Armstrong's performance.

It would seem to me that since all riders are riding the same course,
under the same set of rules and circumstances that *any* winner
regardless of nationality deserves credit for such a great
accomplishment.

Lance is pretty much at Saint status by now. He's untouchable, so don't
worry about it.

Al,

One of the contentions of the Lance "Nay-sayers", is that cycling is
generally a very competitive sport, meaning that it is exceptionally
rare for anyone to dominate within it. Many others who have achieved
top results (including recent TDF winners), we have found later to have
been dopers.

When discussing physiology, the press often talks about how there are
"other athletes" and then there is Lance, and why he is phsiologically
so much better than the other competitors. In reality, many of
Lance's competitors in the TDF match (and in many cases exceed) his
supposed geneitic superiority. When racing at this level, even the
last guy up the mountain tends to be leagues beyond any of "us" in
terms of fitness levels.

Average speeds in the TDF have drastically risen (abnormally, some
might add) since the widespread adoption and abuse of products such as
EPO in recent years. With so many of the "lesser" athletes testing
positive for these drugs in recent years, it leaves many insiders
questioning the possibility that in such an artificial and drug
infested field, how can one man rise above the artificial
pharmacological aids and consistently outdo the others, given the
limits of human performance and the intense competition Lance faces.

It is as if Barry Bonds broke his own record 7 times in a row. Lance
has been very closely linked with a wide variety of people who are well
known to be the gurus/proponents of illegal doping advice. Do a little
research into last year's incident where Lance chased down Simeoni
during one of the flat stages as punishment for breaking the code of
silence. If you are willing to dig a little deeper, and see a little
bit more than what Phil Ligget shows you on OLN, you can see how many
people could have the huevs to accuse Lance of being a doper. And yes,
Lafferty would be one of those people.

The press has taken a very "softball" approach to questioning Lance
about the dope allegations, mainly for fear of being denied access to
an incredible human interest story. Lance, being a cancer survivor is
rather untouchable. He's the great white hope. And many in this forum
believe that Lance can do no wrong...But this group has many visitors,
including some of us who knew Lance (and his dark personality) well
before his journey with Cancer and TDF stardom began.

Let's just say that Lance has hired some very good publicists and has
benefitted from those decisions immensely.

Or perhaps you just might like to keep your head in positive territory
(as many do, right Ken?). It is certainly far easier to believe that
Lance is continually under the grace of God. Myself, I can not ditch
the information I already knew about Lance, so it is harder for me to
be a cheerleader. But I do acknowledge his immesnse accomplishments
and even consider myself a somewhat "fan" of his. But I also know that
pro cycling is a sick, sick sport that has been very corrupted by quite
a few unsportsmanlike people.

al said:

Ernst Noch said:

also content that LA is _not_ the best racer ever (there's some other
european dude mentioned frequently)

I would not know anything about "the best racer ever", given as I noted
earlier that I have not followed bike racing before this year, but I do
know, as must even the most casual observer, that winning as demanding
a competition as the tour must be, seven years in a row, is a special
achievement; one that I am not sure has been or could be rivaled in any
other competitive arena, with the exception of a future "tour" champion
winning more.

Al,

One of the contentions of the Lance "Nay-sayers", is that cycling is
generally a very competitive sport, meaning that it is exceptionally
rare for anyone to dominate within it. Many others who have achieved
top results (including recent TDF winners), we have found later to have
been dopers.

When discussing physiology, the press often talks about how there are
"other athletes" and then there is Lance, and why he is phsiologically
so much better than the other competitors. In reality, many of
Lance's competitors in the TDF match (and in many cases exceed) his
supposed geneitic superiority. When racing at this level, even the
last guy up the mountain tends to be leagues beyond any of "us" in
terms of fitness levels.

Average speeds in the TDF have drastically risen (abnormally, some
might add) since the widespread adoption and abuse of products such as
EPO in recent years. With so many of the "lesser" athletes testing
positive for these drugs in recent years, it leaves many insiders
questioning the possibility that in such an artificial and drug
infested field, how can one man rise above the artificial
pharmacological aids and consistently outdo the others, given the
limits of human performance and the intense competition Lance faces.

It is as if Barry Bonds broke his own record 7 times in a row. Lance
has been very closely linked with a wide variety of people who are well
known to be the gurus/proponents of illegal doping advice. Do a little
research into last year's incident where Lance chased down Simeoni
during one of the flat stages as punishment for breaking the code of
silence. If you are willing to dig a little deeper, and see a little
bit more than what Phil Ligget shows you on OLN, you can see how many
people could have the huevs to accuse Lance of being a doper. And yes,
Lafferty would be one of those people.

The press has taken a very "softball" approach to questioning Lance
about the dope allegations, mainly for fear of being denied access to
an incredible human interest story. Lance, being a cancer survivor is
rather untouchable. He's the great white hope. And many in this forum
believe that Lance can do no wrong...But this group has many visitors,
including some of us who knew Lance (and his dark personality) well
before his journey with Cancer and TDF stardom began.

Let's just say that Lance has hired some very good publicists and has
benefitted from those decisions immensely.

Or perhaps you just might like to keep your head in positive territory
(as many do, right Ken?). It is certainly far easier to believe that
Lance is continually under the grace of God. Myself, I can not ditch
the information I already knew about Lance, so it is harder for me to
be a cheerleader. But I do acknowledge his immesnse accomplishments
and even consider myself a somewhat "fan" of his. But I also know that
pro cycling is a sick, sick sport that has been very corrupted by quite
a few unsportsmanlike people.

al said:

Ernst Noch said:

also content that LA is _not_ the best racer ever (there's some other
european dude mentioned frequently)

I would not know anything about "the best racer ever", given as I noted
earlier that I have not followed bike racing before this year, but I do
know, as must even the most casual observer, that winning as demanding
a competition as the tour must be, seven years in a row, is a special
achievement; one that I am not sure has been or could be rivaled in any
other competitive arena, with the exception of a future "tour" champion
winning more.

Al,

One of the contentions of the Lance "Nay-sayers", is that cycling is
generally a very competitive sport, meaning that it is exceptionally
rare for anyone to dominate within it. Many others who have achieved
top results (including recent TDF winners), we have found later to have
been dopers.

When discussing physiology, the press often talks about how there are
"other athletes" and then there is Lance, and why he is phsiologically
so much better than the other competitors. In reality, many of
Lance's competitors in the TDF match (and in many cases exceed) his
supposed geneitic superiority. When racing at this level, even the
last guy up the mountain tends to be leagues beyond any of "us" in
terms of fitness levels.

Average speeds in the TDF have drastically risen (abnormally, some
might add) since the widespread adoption and abuse of products such as
EPO in recent years. With so many of the "lesser" athletes testing
positive for these drugs in recent years, it leaves many insiders
questioning the possibility that in such an artificial and drug
infested field, how can one man rise above the artificial
pharmacological aids and consistently outdo the others, given the
limits of human performance and the intense competition Lance faces.

It is as if Barry Bonds broke his own record 7 times in a row. Lance
has been very closely linked with a wide variety of people who are well
known to be the gurus/proponents of illegal doping advice. Do a little
research into last year's incident where Lance chased down Simeoni
during one of the flat stages as punishment for breaking the code of
silence. If you are willing to dig a little deeper, and see a little
bit more than what Phil Ligget shows you on OLN, you can see how many
people could have the huevs to accuse Lance of being a doper. And yes,
Lafferty would be one of those people.

The press has taken a very "softball" approach to questioning Lance
about the dope allegations, mainly for fear of being denied access to
an incredible human interest story. Lance, being a cancer survivor is
rather untouchable. He's the great white hope. And many in this forum
believe that Lance can do no wrong...But this group has many visitors,
including some of us who knew Lance (and his dark personality) well
before his journey with Cancer and TDF stardom began.

Let's just say that Lance has hired some very good publicists and has
benefitted from those decisions immensely.

Or perhaps you just might like to keep your head in positive territory
(as many do, right Ken?). It is certainly far easier to believe that
Lance is continually under the grace of God. Myself, I can not ditch
the information I already knew about Lance, so it is harder for me to
be a cheerleader. But I do acknowledge his immesnse accomplishments
and even consider myself a somewhat "fan" of his. But I also know that
pro cycling is a sick, sick sport that has been very corrupted by quite
a few unsportsmanlike people.

al said:

Ernst Noch said:

also content that LA is _not_ the best racer ever (there's some other
european dude mentioned frequently)

I would not know anything about "the best racer ever", given as I noted
earlier that I have not followed bike racing before this year, but I do
know, as must even the most casual observer, that winning as demanding
a competition as the tour must be, seven years in a row, is a special
achievement; one that I am not sure has been or could be rivaled in any
other competitive arena, with the exception of a future "tour" champion
winning more.