How much does L'Equipe hate Lance?

Those other legends commanded people's respect before they started
winning their tours. They won many other races besides their tours.

Lance was a cocky [censored] who'd won a few big things (yes, including a
worlds). He was not well liked by the peloton at-large, and he occupied
pretty much zero in terms of mental equity with the press and the fans
before the 99 Tour.

He was not a candidate for the "all time greats" list before winning
his tours, but most of the others were.

Lance is a guy who won a bunch of TDF's and some other [censored]. The other
guys wona LOT of [censored] AND several tours.

ilan said:

In their list of Tour de France legends Armstrong appears 5th, behind
Indurain!!
http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme/TDF_06_LEGENDES.html
Once again, this proves L'Equipe's irrational hatred of Lance
Armstrong, since
his achievements are objectively superior to Indurain's in almost every
respect:
He won more Tours, he won more stages, he won many road stages during
his overal
wins (Indurain = 0), he won a stage in his first participation, he won
more stages
before his tour wins, etc., etc. He even gave up stage wins, a la
Indurain. As far
as I can tell, Indurain was superior to Armstrong in his domination of
the time
trials by almost 3 minutes in two of his tour wins.

Oh, and note that in their caption on Tour legends, Armstrong does not
even
appear, as they only give pictures of their top 4.

-ilan

L'Equipe don't hate anyone. They run a for profit business and are only
interested in making money, all else be damned. Read your own post for
proof of this.

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

Quoted message said:

In their list of Tour de France legends Armstrong appears 5th, behind
Indurain!!
http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme/TDF_06_LEGENDES.html
Once again, this proves L'Equipe's irrational hatred of Lance
Armstrong, since
his achievements are objectively superior to Indurain's in almost every
respect:
He won more Tours, he won more stages, he won many road stages during
his overal
wins (Indurain = 0), he won a stage in his first participation, he won
more stages
before his tour wins, etc., etc. He even gave up stage wins, a la
Indurain. As far
as I can tell, Indurain was superior to Armstrong in his domination of
the time
trials by almost 3 minutes in two of his tour wins.

Oh, and note that in their caption on Tour legends, Armstrong does not
even
appear, as they only give pictures of their top 4.

-ilan

perhaps because Armstrong victorys are more of a team colaboration? perhaps
a personality thing too, Indurain would have the edge, ole uncle miguel

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

Quoted message said:

In their list of Tour de France legends Armstrong appears 5th, behind
Indurain!!
http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme/TDF_06_LEGENDES.html
Once again, this proves L'Equipe's irrational hatred of Lance
Armstrong, since
his achievements are objectively superior to Indurain's in almost every
respect:
He won more Tours, he won more stages, he won many road stages during
his overal
wins (Indurain = 0), he won a stage in his first participation, he won
more stages
before his tour wins, etc., etc. He even gave up stage wins, a la
Indurain. As far
as I can tell, Indurain was superior to Armstrong in his domination of
the time
trials by almost 3 minutes in two of his tour wins.

Oh, and note that in their caption on Tour legends, Armstrong does not
even
appear, as they only give pictures of their top 4.

-ilan

Those astute enough to think back would remember that not only was Eddy
Merckx framed for doping, but many races including the Tour de France paid
him to NOT show. It wouldn't be hard to use that as a demonstration that
well-liked is hardly a word that was used for Eddy Merckx.

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

Quoted message said:

Those other legends commanded people's respect before they started
winning their tours. They won many other races besides their tours.

Lance was a cocky [censored] who'd won a few big things (yes, including a
worlds). He was not well liked by the peloton at-large, and he occupied
pretty much zero in terms of mental equity with the press and the fans
before the 99 Tour.

He was not a candidate for the "all time greats" list before winning
his tours, but most of the others were.

Lance is a guy who won a bunch of TDF's and some other [censored]. The other
guys wona LOT of [censored] AND several tours.

ilan said:

In their list of Tour de France legends Armstrong appears 5th, behind
Indurain!!
http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme/TDF_06_LEGENDES.html
Once again, this proves L'Equipe's irrational hatred of Lance
Armstrong, since
his achievements are objectively superior to Indurain's in almost every
respect:
He won more Tours, he won more stages, he won many road stages during
his overal
wins (Indurain = 0), he won a stage in his first participation, he won
more stages
before his tour wins, etc., etc. He even gave up stage wins, a la
Indurain. As far
as I can tell, Indurain was superior to Armstrong in his domination of
the time
trials by almost 3 minutes in two of his tour wins.

Oh, and note that in their caption on Tour legends, Armstrong does not
even
appear, as they only give pictures of their top 4.

-ilan

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

Quoted message said:

L'Equipe don't hate anyone. They run a for profit business and are only
interested in making money, all else be damned. Read your own post for
proof of this.

Tell us - doesn't it smell really bad up there where your head is?

Note that my comparison was with Indurain, not the other 3 persons.
Before winning the Tour de France, Indurain was best known as a
Delgado 'super domestique'.

In any case, Armstrong won more races than Indurain, even if you don't
count
the Tour de France. Indurain did win the Tour of Italy, but I believe
that
Lance's 2 extra Tours de France wins count for more than that. It
is true that Indurain won an Olympic gold medal, but I believe that
Lance's World's road race win (where he beat Indurain in his prime)
counts
for more. Indurain won one Classic road race, San Sebastian, but so did
Armstrong, who also won the Fleche Wallonne.

Clearly, Armstrong is way ahead of Indurain.

-ilan

Quoted message said:

Those other legends commanded people's respect before they started
winning their tours. They won many other races besides their tours.

Lance was a cocky [censored] who'd won a few big things (yes, including a
worlds). He was not well liked by the peloton at-large, and he occupied
pretty much zero in terms of mental equity with the press and the fans
before the 99 Tour.

He was not a candidate for the "all time greats" list before winning
his tours, but most of the others were.

Lance is a guy who won a bunch of TDF's and some other [censored]. The other
guys wona LOT of [censored] AND several tours.

ilan said:

In their list of Tour de France legends Armstrong appears 5th, behind
Indurain!!
http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme/TDF_06_LEGENDES.html
Once again, this proves L'Equipe's irrational hatred of Lance
Armstrong, since
his achievements are objectively superior to Indurain's in almost every
respect:
He won more Tours, he won more stages, he won many road stages during
his overal
wins (Indurain = 0), he won a stage in his first participation, he won
more stages
before his tour wins, etc., etc. He even gave up stage wins, a la
Indurain. As far
as I can tell, Indurain was superior to Armstrong in his domination of
the time
trials by almost 3 minutes in two of his tour wins.

Oh, and note that in their caption on Tour legends, Armstrong does not
even
appear, as they only give pictures of their top 4.

-ilan

Keiron wrote (or actually, top posted):

Quoted message said:

perhaps because Armstrong victorys are more of a team colaboration? perhaps
a personality thing too, Indurain would have the edge, ole uncle miguel

I've heard the argument that Indrain lost his first Tour in large part
because he lost two or three key teammates previous to the start,
because his own paycheck more or less crowded them out.

Did some pretty good teamwork with Chiapucci, too.

One place that Lemond can claim some superiority. Winning T'sdF against
your own team, and with a weak team, plus being able to win Worlds RR
with no team (apologies, but) and in spite of the Italian effort.
Another good reason he should have just been quiet or at least careful
starting years ago. And not gone turkey hunting with his
brother-in-law, of course. Duclos-Lasalle tested that road previously,
no? --D-y

Quoted message said:

Note that my comparison was with Indurain, not the other 3 persons.
Before winning the Tour de France, Indurain was best known as a
Delgado 'super domestique'.

If only Acevedo were a bit younger...

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

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

Quoted message said:

Note that my comparison was with Indurain, not the other 3 persons.
Before winning the Tour de France, Indurain was best known as a
Delgado 'super domestique'.

In any case, Armstrong won more races than Indurain, even if you don't
count
the Tour de France. Indurain did win the Tour of Italy, but I believe
that
Lance's 2 extra Tours de France wins count for more than that. It
is true that Indurain won an Olympic gold medal, but I believe that
Lance's World's road race win (where he beat Indurain in his prime)
counts
for more. Indurain won one Classic road race, San Sebastian, but so did
Armstrong, who also won the Fleche Wallonne.

Clearly, Armstrong is way ahead of Indurain.

-ilan

Quoted message said:

Those other legends commanded people's respect before they started
winning their tours. They won many other races besides their tours.

Lance was a cocky [censored] who'd won a few big things (yes, including a
worlds). He was not well liked by the peloton at-large, and he occupied
pretty much zero in terms of mental equity with the press and the fans
before the 99 Tour.

He was not a candidate for the "all time greats" list before winning
his tours, but most of the others were.

Lance is a guy who won a bunch of TDF's and some other [censored]. The other
guys wona LOT of [censored] AND several tours.

ilan said:

In their list of Tour de France legends Armstrong appears 5th, behind
Indurain!!
http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme/TDF_06_LEGENDES.html
Once again, this proves L'Equipe's irrational hatred of Lance
Armstrong, since
his achievements are objectively superior to Indurain's in almost every
respect:
He won more Tours, he won more stages, he won many road stages during
his overal
wins (Indurain = 0), he won a stage in his first participation, he won
more stages
before his tour wins, etc., etc. He even gave up stage wins, a la
Indurain. As far
as I can tell, Indurain was superior to Armstrong in his domination of
the time
trials by almost 3 minutes in two of his tour wins.

Oh, and note that in their caption on Tour legends, Armstrong does not
even
appear, as they only give pictures of their top 4.

-ilan

ilan said:

Note that my comparison was with Indurain, not the other 3 persons.
Before winning the Tour de France, Indurain was best known as a
Delgado 'super domestique'.

In any case, Armstrong won more races than Indurain, even if you don't
count
the Tour de France. Indurain did win the Tour of Italy, but I believe

TWICE, right? 1992 and '93?

Quoted message said:

that
Lance's 2 extra Tours de France wins count for more than that. It
is true that Indurain won an Olympic gold medal, but I believe that
Lance's World's road race win (where he beat Indurain in his prime)
counts
for more. Indurain won one Classic road race, San Sebastian, but so did
Armstrong, who also won the Fleche Wallonne.

Bring it brother.

-KJP (another hated July Poster)

Quoted message said:

Clearly, Armstrong is way ahead of Indurain.

-ilan

Quoted message said:

Those other legends commanded people's respect before they started
winning their tours. They won many other races besides their tours.

Lance was a cocky [censored] who'd won a few big things (yes, including a
worlds). He was not well liked by the peloton at-large, and he occupied
pretty much zero in terms of mental equity with the press and the fans
before the 99 Tour.

He was not a candidate for the "all time greats" list before winning
his tours, but most of the others were.

Lance is a guy who won a bunch of TDF's and some other [censored]. The other
guys wona LOT of [censored] AND several tours.

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

Quoted message said:

In their list of Tour de France legends Armstrong appears 5th, behind
Indurain!!
http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme/TDF_06_LEGENDES.html
Once again, this proves L'Equipe's irrational hatred of Lance
Armstrong, since
his achievements are objectively superior to Indurain's in almost every
respect:
He won more Tours, he won more stages, he won many road stages during
his overal
wins (Indurain = 0), he won a stage in his first participation, he won
more stages
before his tour wins, etc., etc. He even gave up stage wins, a la
Indurain. As far
as I can tell, Indurain was superior to Armstrong in his domination of
the time
trials by almost 3 minutes in two of his tour wins.

Oh, and note that in their caption on Tour legends, Armstrong does not
even
appear, as they only give pictures of their top 4.

It doesn't prove anything. A list with Virenque and Jalabert, but without
Coppi and Bartali certainly doesn't pretend to be a list of the fifteen best
Tour-riders or something like that, but only a very subjective choice, not
of 'Equipe, but of a certain Bertrand Pertuis.

Benjo

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

Quoted message said:

Those astute enough to think back would remember that not only was Eddy
Merckx framed for doping, but many races including the Tour de France paid
him to NOT show. It wouldn't be hard to use that as a demonstration that
well-liked is hardly a word that was used for Eddy Merckx.

Do tell us which races paid Merckx to not appear.

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Those other legends commanded people's respect before they started
winning their tours. They won many other races besides their tours.

Lance was a cocky [censored] who'd won a few big things (yes, including a
worlds). He was not well liked by the peloton at-large, and he occupied
pretty much zero in terms of mental equity with the press and the fans
before the 99 Tour.

He was not a candidate for the "all time greats" list before winning
his tours, but most of the others were.

Lance is a guy who won a bunch of TDF's and some other [censored]. The other
guys wona LOT of [censored] AND several tours.

ilan said:

In their list of Tour de France legends Armstrong appears 5th, behind
Indurain!!
http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme/TDF_06_LEGENDES.html
Once again, this proves L'Equipe's irrational hatred of Lance
Armstrong, since
his achievements are objectively superior to Indurain's in almost every
respect:
He won more Tours, he won more stages, he won many road stages during
his overal
wins (Indurain = 0), he won a stage in his first participation, he won
more stages
before his tour wins, etc., etc. He even gave up stage wins, a la
Indurain. As far
as I can tell, Indurain was superior to Armstrong in his domination of
the time
trials by almost 3 minutes in two of his tour wins.

Oh, and note that in their caption on Tour legends, Armstrong does not
even
appear, as they only give pictures of their top 4.

-ilan

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

L'Equipe don't hate anyone. They run a for profit business and are only
interested in making money, all else be damned. Read your own post for
proof of this.

Tell us - doesn't it smell really bad up there where your head is?

Believe me, L'Equipe do this for the controversy/money. Nothing else makes
sense.

k.papai said:

-KJP (another hated July Poster)

Welcome back Ken!! Glad to see you!
If you've been lurking you've seen not much has changed. Lance's
string of court victories really don't mean anything, they were all
just technicalities. ;-)
Bill C

in message <[email hidden]>, routebear

(') said:

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

L'Equipe don't hate anyone. They run a for profit business and are
only
interested in making money, all else be damned. Read your own post
for proof of this.

Tell us - doesn't it smell really bad up there where your head is?

Believe me, L'Equipe do this for the controversy/money. Nothing else
makes sense.

L'Equipe also sells papers in France. Believe me, you don't sell papers
in France by saying how wonderful and clean the good Mr Headstrong is.
Whatever the editor and writers of l'Equipe may think, they write what
their public wants to read.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

There are no messages. The above is just a random stream of
bytes. Any opinion or meaning you find in it is your own creation.

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

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, routebear

(') said:

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

Quoted message said:

"routebear" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> L'Equipe don't hate anyone. They run a for profit business and are
> only
> interested in making money, all else be damned. Read your own post
> for proof of this.

Tell us - doesn't it smell really bad up there where your head is?

Believe me, L'Equipe do this for the controversy/money. Nothing else
makes sense.

L'Equipe also sells papers in France. Believe me, you don't sell papers
in France by saying how wonderful and clean the good Mr Headstrong is.
Whatever the editor and writers of l'Equipe may think, they write what
their public wants to read.

If you regularly read L'Equipe, you know that over the years it has been
very supportive of Armstrong with many very positively worded headlines
concerning his exploits. A cynic would say they did this opportunisticly to
sell papers. L'Equipe is also very serious about covering drugs in
sport---and not just cycling. They have a specific team assigned to drug
stories full time.

Rissot's stated reason for digging as to Armstrong, was Armstrong's verbal
challenge to the press to prove he was using illegal products. Rissot took
up the challenge and.......there you have it.

Quoted message said:

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

There are no messages. The above is just a random stream of
bytes. Any opinion or meaning you find in it is your own creation.

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

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, routebear

(') said:

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

Quoted message said:

"routebear" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> L'Equipe don't hate anyone. They run a for profit business and are
> only
> interested in making money, all else be damned. Read your own post
> for proof of this.

Tell us - doesn't it smell really bad up there where your head is?

Believe me, L'Equipe do this for the controversy/money. Nothing else
makes sense.

L'Equipe also sells papers in France.

What do you mean by 'also'? How else do they make money? I honestly didn't
know they did anything else.

Quoted message said:

Believe me, you don't sell papers
in France by saying how wonderful and clean the good Mr Headstrong is.
Whatever the editor and writers of l'Equipe may think, they write what
their public wants to read.

Exactly. Well put.

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Those astute enough to think back would remember that not only was Eddy
Merckx framed for doping, but many races including the Tour de France
paid him to NOT show. It wouldn't be hard to use that as a demonstration
that well-liked is hardly a word that was used for Eddy Merckx.

Do tell us which races paid Merckx to not appear.

Tour de France '73. Several Six Day races. Others.

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

Quoted message said:

Note that my comparison was with Indurain, not the other 3 persons.
Before winning the Tour de France, Indurain was best known as a
Delgado 'super domestique'.

In '89 Indurain didn't look like much. In '90 he was greatly improved. Of
course by the Lafferty Rule that means he doped. But others might note that
he lost a LOT of weight over the winter.

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

L'Equipe don't hate anyone. They run a for profit business and are
only
interested in making money, all else be damned. Read your own post for
proof of this.

Tell us - doesn't it smell really bad up there where your head is?

Believe me, L'Equipe do this for the controversy/money. Nothing else
makes
sense.

No, the attacks on Armstrong have been far too long and far too harsh.
L'Equipe made Virenque into a hero as well for the same sorts of reasons.

Unless you believe that the French are all violent Amerophobes the only
reason I can think of for the level of the attacks on Armstrong is a
personal grudge by a high ranking member of the staff.

And I saw that memorial near Grey (Americans only past this point - it was
their blood that sanctified this soil) and know what it meant. So I simply
don't believe that most French want to read such violently anti-Lance
propaganda.