Great Hope?

Tom said:

Why all the talk about Danielson this, and Danielson that? Last I
knew, he hadn't finished a major Grand Tour and people are picking him
to WIN the Vuelta?? Come on folks. And all of this talk about him
being "young", yeah, I guess to some of us, 27 is young, but in pro
bike racing, it's not so young now is it? This guy has got to prove
himself soon, or it's game over. I kind of hope that he does, but
let's get all steamy over someone who has barely raced his bike in
Europe against the best competition in the world just yet.

Like Hamilton, he started late. His body still has to fully acclimate to
the high speeds in Grand Tours, and to do that he has to simply ride
them, even if it means finishing in the middle of the pack (it will) and
scrapping for stage wins.

tyler started racing and winning as a secondary school student.
e-RICHIE©™®

Tom said:

Why all the talk about Danielson this, and Danielson that? Last I
knew, he hadn't finished a major Grand Tour and people are picking him
to WIN the Vuelta?? Come on folks. And all of this talk about him
being "young", yeah, I guess to some of us, 27 is young, but in pro
bike racing, it's not so young now is it? This guy has got to prove
himself soon, or it's game over. I kind of hope that he does, but
let's get all steamy over someone who has barely raced his bike in
Europe against the best competition in the world just yet.

Tom

People want a new Lance to emerge, and Danielson is really the only
hope of that, far fetched as it might seem to some of us.
He's improving every season, which is a good sigh, winning GA. was the
first little step, winning the Vuelta this year seems a little soon, I
think he'll win a one week tour, like Paris-Nice first, or Catalonia,
something like that, Basque Country before he'll win a 3 week stage
race.

he get's better every year, if he keeps getting better every year,
eventually he might win a 3 week tour, if not, he might end up the next
Vaughters, getting the odd result and being a solid pro,
give him a few years before you write him off, I hear it takes some
time to adjust to the racing and lifestyle before you can concentrate
on doing your best bike racing.
Some people on this list DESPERATELY need an american cyclist to jock
and dream about at night, so losing Lance has to be have been pretty
rough for them.

Tom said:

Why all the talk about Danielson this, and Danielson that? Last I
knew, he hadn't finished a major Grand Tour and people are picking him
to WIN the Vuelta?? Come on folks. And all of this talk about him
being "young", yeah, I guess to some of us, 27 is young, but in pro
bike racing, it's not so young now is it? This guy has got to prove
himself soon, or it's game over. I kind of hope that he does, but
let's get all steamy over someone who has barely raced his bike in
Europe against the best competition in the world just yet.

Tom

A selection of ProTour riders who are younger than T. Danielson:

Michael Albasini
Tom Boonen
Fabian Cancellara
Jimmy Casper
Sylvain Chavanel
Aurelien Clerc
Baden Cooke
Alberto Contador
Michael Creed
Damiano Cunego
Alan Davis
Thomas Dekker
Bernhard Eisel
Martin Elmiger
Marcus Fothen
Linus Gerdeman
Philippe Gilbert
Andriy Grivko
Vladimir Gusev
Vladimir Karpets
Andrei Kashechkin
Kim Kirchen
Thomas Lovkvist
Nick Nuyens
Sergio Paulinho
Yaroslav Popovych
Filippo Pozzato
Saul Raisin
Mark Renshaw
Michael Rogers
Michele Scarponi
Frank Schleck
Patrick Sinkewitz
Bram Tankink
Johan Tschopp
Alejandro Valverde
Wim Van Huffel
Thomas Voekler
Pieter Weening
Fabian Wegmann
Bradley Wiggins
David Zabriskie
Thomas Ziegler

[email hidden] schreef:

Quoted message said:

Tom said:

Why all the talk about Danielson this, and Danielson that? Last I
knew, he hadn't finished a major Grand Tour and people are picking him
to WIN the Vuelta?? Come on folks. And all of this talk about him
being "young", yeah, I guess to some of us, 27 is young, but in pro
bike racing, it's not so young now is it? This guy has got to prove
himself soon, or it's game over. I kind of hope that he does, but
let's get all steamy over someone who has barely raced his bike in
Europe against the best competition in the world just yet.

Tom

People want a new Lance to emerge, and Danielson is really the only
hope of that, far fetched as it might seem to some of us.
He's improving every season, which is a good sigh, winning GA. was the
first little step, winning the Vuelta this year seems a little soon, I
think he'll win a one week tour, like Paris-Nice first, or Catalonia,
something like that, Basque Country before he'll win a 3 week stage
race.

How is this Tyler Farrar guy doing at this moment? Any info about him?

Kenny

Quoted message said:

Tom said:

Why all the talk about Danielson this, and Danielson that? Last I
knew, he hadn't finished a major Grand Tour and people are picking him
to WIN the Vuelta??

mike said:

People want a new Lance to emerge, and Danielson is really the only
hope of that, far fetched as it might seem to some of us.

Why not just lop off one of his testicles and see what happens ? Perhaps
voluntary loss of a testicle is written into the Dicovery contract.

Quoted message said:

Some people on this list DESPERATELY need an american cyclist to jock
and dream about at night, so losing Lance has to be have been pretty
rough for them.

I don't think anyone desperately needs an American cyclist, but it is
patently clear that there are many who desperately need to denigrate
the successes of American cyclists in general and of Lance Armstrong in
particular in recent years.

mj

Tom said:

Why all the talk about Danielson this, and Danielson that? Last I
knew, he hadn't finished a major Grand Tour and people are picking him
to WIN the Vuelta?? Come on folks. And all of this talk about him
being "young", yeah, I guess to some of us, 27 is young, but in pro
bike racing, it's not so young now is it? This guy has got to prove
himself soon, or it's game over. I kind of hope that he does, but
let's get all steamy over someone who has barely raced his bike in
Europe against the best competition in the world just yet.

Danielson is looking real strong in the ACT - he's in fifth position of
the GC, 2:05 behind the leader. Danielson can CLIMB, and it looks like
he gets stronger in each race.

mj

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Some people on this list DESPERATELY need an american cyclist to jock
and dream about at night, so losing Lance has to be have been pretty
rough for them.

I don't think anyone desperately needs an American cyclist, but it is
patently clear that there are many who desperately need to denigrate
the successes of American cyclists in general and of Lance Armstrong in
particular in recent years.

mj

I don't think anyone desperately NEEDS to denigrate the successes of
American cyclists in general and of Lance Armstrong in particular. It's just
fun to watch the Lance worshippers and USA-firsters go ballastic and start
calling people names when somebody refuses to bow before their altar. Too
bad usenet doesn't have webcam capability so we can watch their veins
popping real-time.

moorehead_johnson@hotmail­.com wrote:
I don't think anyone desperately needs an American cyclist, but it is
patently clear that there are many who desperately need to denigrate
the successes of American cyclists in general and of Lance Armstrong in

particular in recent years.

Why would anyone need to defend a dude who won 7 TDF's from a bunch
of internet gossipmongering malcontents like myself?
But I'm very interested to see what happens to the OLN Cyclysm and all
that
BS now that Lance is gone, I bet unless someone like Danielson steps
up then cycling won't see 1/4 of the coverage and publicity it gets
now.
So, financially, OLN and Discovery want a new Armstrong. They need one.

and many american fans won't be content with Landis and Leipheimer
getting
8ths and 9ths - most americans aren't big fans of "losers", it's
ingrained into
our sporting culture. Raymond Poulidor wouldn't be a big celebrity here
in the USA the way he is in France - eternal seconds are the first
loser to many americans.
Cycling is a sport of losing really, 185 guys out there, only one
winner.
I can see OLN showing 30 minute "highlight" shows of the tour so they
can devote more time to more lucrative programming like bull riding,
BBQ cookoffs, and hunting.

trg said:

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Some people on this list DESPERATELY need an american cyclist to jock
and dream about at night, so losing Lance has to be have been pretty
rough for them.

I don't think anyone desperately needs an American cyclist, but it is
patently clear that there are many who desperately need to denigrate
the successes of American cyclists in general and of Lance Armstrong in
particular in recent years.

mj

I don't think anyone desperately NEEDS to denigrate the successes of
American cyclists in general and of Lance Armstrong in particular. It's just
fun to watch the Lance worshippers and USA-firsters go ballastic and start
calling people names when somebody refuses to bow before their altar.

Can I ask - was it just as *fun* to watch the Indurain worshippers and
Spain-firsters go ballistic when people refused to bow down before
their altar? Merckx and Belgium-firster worshippers? Or is it *just*
fun to watch Lance worshippers "go ballistic"?

Call me a cynic, but I just get the feeling the Lance-bashing from is
more about anti-Americanism than anything else. On the other hand, it
could be genuine anger at seeing your favorite cyclist beaten in the
TdF again and again again, year after year, for 7 years straight, by a
spindly-legged cycling freak from Texas (of all places).

Whatever the reason for the Lance-bashing, it's pretty lame. And sad.

mj

Quoted message said:

american fans won't be content with Landis and Leipheimer
getting
8ths and 9ths - most americans aren't big fans of "losers", it's
ingrained into
our sporting culture.

Bike racing's popularity in the US has a bigger problem than that.
Americans don't even like international sports... since they like to
pretend that the rest of the world doesn't exist as much as possible.
They much prefer sports that have teams and leagues that compete only
domestically and in Canada... not a bunch of foreigners from countries
where they can't understand what they're saying.

Even if there was a new US winner in the Tour, they still wouldn't be
interested. It was primarily Armstrong's human interest story and
celebrity status from *that* that made them tune in.

We're in for a big downturn... no matter what.

-Ron

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de
news:[email hidden]...

trg said:

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Some people on this list DESPERATELY need an american cyclist to jock
and dream about at night, so losing Lance has to be have been pretty
rough for them.

I don't think anyone desperately needs an American cyclist, but it is
patently clear that there are many who desperately need to denigrate
the successes of American cyclists in general and of Lance Armstrong in
particular in recent years.

mj

I don't think anyone desperately NEEDS to denigrate the successes of
American cyclists in general and of Lance Armstrong in particular. It's

just

Quoted message said:

fun to watch the Lance worshippers and USA-firsters go ballastic and start
calling people names when somebody refuses to bow before their altar.

Can I ask - was it just as *fun* to watch the Indurain worshippers and
Spain-firsters go ballistic when people refused to bow down before
their altar? Merckx and Belgium-firster worshippers? Or is it *just*
fun to watch Lance worshippers "go ballistic"?

Spain-firsters. Good one.

Ron Ruff said:

Quoted message said:

american fans won't be content with Landis and Leipheimer
getting
8ths and 9ths - most americans aren't big fans of "losers", it's
ingrained into
our sporting culture.

Bike racing's popularity in the US has a bigger problem than that.
Americans don't even like international sports... since they like to
pretend that the rest of the world doesn't exist as much as possible.
They much prefer sports that have teams and leagues that compete only
domestically and in Canada... not a bunch of foreigners from countries
where they can't understand what they're saying.

Eating fruit from the tree of gross generalizations, I see.

Quoted message said:

Even if there was a new US winner in the Tour, they still wouldn't be
interested. It was primarily Armstrong's human interest story and
celebrity status from *that* that made them tune in.

We're in for a big downturn... no matter what.

A friend of mine in the bike biz says he's seen a gradually rising
interest in cycling in the US over the last 10 years, pre-dating
Lance's first TdF win in 1999. That being said, I don't understand the
implication that because American's haven't embraced professional
cycling the way Europe has that somehow means Americans must be
xenophobic, or racists, or stupid, or [fill-in-the-blank]. It's a
SPORT for chrissakes....every country has it's own culture, and that
culture expresses likes and dislikes in its own way. To heap some sort
of special importance on one sport over another sport is simply
bizarre, IMHO.

mj

trg said:

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de
news:[email hidden]...

trg said:

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

> Some people on this list DESPERATELY need an american cyclist to jock
> and dream about at night, so losing Lance has to be have been pretty
> rough for them.

I don't think anyone desperately needs an American cyclist, but it is
patently clear that there are many who desperately need to denigrate
the successes of American cyclists in general and of Lance Armstrong in
particular in recent years.

mj

I don't think anyone desperately NEEDS to denigrate the successes of
American cyclists in general and of Lance Armstrong in particular. It's

just

Quoted message said:

fun to watch the Lance worshippers and USA-firsters go ballastic and start
calling people names when somebody refuses to bow before their altar.

Quoted message said:

Can I ask - was it just as *fun* to watch the Indurain worshippers and
Spain-firsters go ballistic when people refused to bow down before
their altar? Merckx and Belgium-firster worshippers? Or is it *just*
fun to watch Lance worshippers "go ballistic"?

Spain-firsters. Good one.

I thought Belgium-firsters was better.

Quoted message said:

I don't understand the
implication that because American's haven't embraced professional
cycling the way Europe has that somehow means Americans must be
xenophobic, or racists, or stupid, or [fill-in-the-blank]. It's a
SPORT for chrissakes....every country has it's own culture, and that
culture expresses likes and dislikes in its own way.

The US is geographically isolated from Europe and other modern
industrialized countries, and we were economically "first" for a few
decades, so it isn't surprising that our attitudes about many things
tend to be isolated. Xenophobia and a general lack of interest or
empathy with the rest of the world stem from that. It is this
perspective that makes international sports (not just cycling) a hard
sell here... not the other way around.

Ron Ruff said:

Quoted message said:

I don't understand the
implication that because American's haven't embraced professional
cycling the way Europe has that somehow means Americans must be
xenophobic, or racists, or stupid, or [fill-in-the-blank]. It's a
SPORT for chrissakes....every country has it's own culture, and that
culture expresses likes and dislikes in its own way.

The US is geographically isolated from Europe and other modern
industrialized countries, and we were economically "first" for a few
decades, so it isn't surprising that our attitudes about many things
tend to be isolated. Xenophobia and a general lack of interest or
empathy with the rest of the world stem from that. It is this
perspective that makes international sports (not just cycling) a hard
sell here... not the other way around.

Is the US geographically isolated from Europe? I thought Europe was
geographically isolated from the US. Not that it matters - it's a
strawman argument. We're not exactly isolated from Mexico and central
America where soccer is King, yet Americans aren't exactly flocking to
see professional soccer teams play. Nor does it seem that Mexicans and
Central Americans are professional cycling fanatics, yet those counties
never seem to be criticized for a "lack of interest" or "empathy" with
the rest of the world. These are just more strawmen arguments in a
lame attempt to hide irrational anti-American sentiment, it would
appear.

mj

Ron Ruff said:

It is this
perspective that makes international sports (not just cycling) a hard
sell here... not the other way around.

Tennis, hockey and golf are international sport that do well in the
US.

The Olympics, both winter and summer, are big events in the US and
soccer is growing in popularity every year.

And, I needn't remind you that basketball is the second most popular
sport in the world. So, while basketball is a US sport, it has a huge
international following and the number of non-US players in the NBA
grows every year. The NBA might be a US domestic lerague, but the
world is watching. Similarly, MLB has over one third of its players
from outside the US and if Fidel would only kick off the number would
grow as more Cubans would join the league.

So to say the US is not interested in international sports is not
quite accurate and US sports are becoming more and more international
every year.

And you can mark my words, Curling will be big some day.

Jack Hollis said:

So to say the US is not interested in international sports is not
quite accurate and US sports are becoming more and more international
every year.

The obvious exception, of course, being women's (sports with only all
female teams) sports - you know, the IOC eliminated softball at the
next summer Olympics, it being the only sport in the Olympics with only
all women competitors. Fat chance of softball becoming more
international, eh?

N.