Radios suck

yeahyeah said:

Quoted message said:

yeahyeah said:

trg wrote:

>Landis climbed l'Alpe d'Huez in the same time as Armstrong in 2001, (which
>was 2 minutes faster than Ullrich's time. and 30 second short of Pantani's
>record time)
>
>Maybe he was fresh out of gusto.

Au contraire:
37'35 - Marco Pantani, 1997 (fastest)
38'01 - Lance Armstrong, 2001
39'45 - Miguel Indurain, 1991
41'50 - Laurent Fignon, 1989
48'00 - Bernard Hinault/Greg Lemond, 1986

I believe today's ascent was 41' - putting it well within the "pre-EPO"
time of the Lemond era.

Cyclingnews suggested Schleck did it in 41 minutes, but
Landis and Kloden took 39 minutes - which is about right
if Schleck had a 3 minute advantage at the base and 1 minute
at the top. However, if you compare to the 2001 stage, in 2001
it was a 209 km stage with 1 cat 3 and 3 HC climbs (the Col du
Madeleine, Col du Glandon, and l'Alpe) and took over 6 hours.
Today's stage was 187 km with 1 cat 2 and only 2 HC climbs
and took just under 5 hours. (Yes, I am a geek and looked up
the profiles and times on cyclingnews.)

So it looks like the 2006 stage was significantly easier than
2001, which is why it is hard to cross-compare times.
Still Floyd and Kloden's time was fast enough that, though they
weren't extraterrestrial, nobody should accuse them of loafing.

Ben
loafing

I must have misunderstood the 41' thing...
I realize radios can make flat/transitional stages utterly
mind-numbingly dull, but i can't see how a radio will make you climb
faster - unless it's some sort of magic radio that provides stimulus to
your leg muscles.

It is called a "tens" unit that sends electical shocks to the muscle to
relieve pain.

It seemed strange to me that Landis didnt get more time on them. This
could be the reason why. Or perhaps he's just only a bit better than
everyone else, but that bit is enough. I think he made 2 attacks up the
summit, not sure if he could have been more aggresive, i was listening
to the eurosport feed. Perhaps he was worried about tomorrow..

Quoted message said:

The radios suck, and make bike racing so f'ing boring now. Instead of
being able to watch real winners go on the attack, we get to see Floyd
"monitor" the progress of the two guys up the road. The guy who wins
the TDF is the guy who can climb well, but has the best radio updates.

So big deal. Landis came in slightly ahead of Kloden. He could have
taken the lead back with gusto...And he could have put a significant
time gap into his closest rival if he wanted to.

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

So big deal. Landis came in slightly ahead of Kloden. He could have
taken the lead back with gusto...And he could have put a significant
time gap into his closest rival if he wanted to.

Two hideous stages ensue. Three HC's and three
category 1's. He can put significant time into them on
Thursday; _if_ he has gas in the tank. Phonak and Landis
have run a flawless race.

"I'm telling you, I can't get any respect."

--
Michael Press

Quoted message said:

The radios suck, and make bike racing so f'ing boring now. Instead of
being able to watch real winners go on the attack, we get to see Floyd
"monitor" the progress of the two guys up the road. The guy who wins
the TDF is the guy who can climb well, but has the best radio updates.

If you got rid of the radios he'd still be able to monitor the
two guys up the road. To prevent that you'd have to get rid of
this guy:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2005/tour05/?id=features/tour_moto/hk_3

I think the Tour would be more interesting if they got rid of
those damn derailleurs. And could you imagine what it would be
like if each country got a single national team and they filled
out the field with regional French teams?

They should make them dope the way that Coppi did! That'd be a
Tour to watch.

Bob Schwartz

"shane" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...
| It seemed strange to me that Landis didnt get more time on them. This
| could be the reason why. Or perhaps he's just only a bit better than
| everyone else, but that bit is enough. I think he made 2 attacks up the
| summit, not sure if he could have been more aggresive, i was listening
| to the eurosport feed. Perhaps he was worried about tomorrow..
|
|
|
| [email hidden] wrote:
| > The radios suck, and make bike racing so f'ing boring now. Instead of
| > being able to watch real winners go on the attack, we get to see Floyd
| > "monitor" the progress of the two guys up the road. The guy who wins
| > the TDF is the guy who can climb well, but has the best radio updates.
| >
| > So big deal. Landis came in slightly ahead of Kloden. He could have
| > taken the lead back with gusto...And he could have put a significant
| > time gap into his closest rival if he wanted to.
| >
|

Landis climbed l'Alpe d'Huez in the same time as Armstrong in 2001, (which
was 2 minutes faster than Ullrich's time. and 30 second short of Pantani's
record time)

Maybe he was fresh out of gusto.

Quoted message said:

The radios suck, and make bike racing so f'ing boring now. Instead of
being able to watch real winners go on the attack, we get to see Floyd
"monitor" the progress of the two guys up the road. The guy who wins
the TDF is the guy who can climb well, but has the best radio updates.

So big deal. Landis came in slightly ahead of Kloden. He could have
taken the lead back with gusto...And he could have put a significant
time gap into his closest rival if he wanted to.

Top 10
1. Frank Schleck (Lux), CSC
2. Damiano Cunego (I), Lampre, at 0:11
3. Stefano Garzelli (I), Liquigas-Bianchi, at 1:10
4. Floyd Landis (USA), Phonak, same time
5. Andréas Klöden (G), T-Mobile, s.t.
6. Ruben Lobato (Sp), Saunier Duval, at 1:14
7. Sylvain Chavanel (F), Cofidis, at 1:18
8. Eddy Mazzoleni (I), T-Mobile, at 1:28
9. Carlos Sastre (Sp), CSC, at 1:35
10. Levi Leipheimer (USA), Gerolsteiner, at 1:49

I've read a number of your posts over the past few days, and I have a
couple of questions:

1) what are you so mad about? Everything seems to [censored] you off.

2) if you're so damn smart, how come your not running your own pro
team? or, at a minimum, serving as a paid consultant?

Scott

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The radios suck, and make bike racing so f'ing boring now. Instead of
being able to watch real winners go on the attack, we get to see Floyd
"monitor" the progress of the two guys up the road. The guy who wins
the TDF is the guy who can climb well, but has the best radio updates.

So big deal. Landis came in slightly ahead of Kloden. He could have
taken the lead back with gusto...And he could have put a significant
time gap into his closest rival if he wanted to.

Untill they come up with a "no radio" rule in the Tour, we're doomed to
seeing the GC winner sit back and "hang" on the tough climbs (as guys
lower on GC are allowed to go out and win). The yellow jersey will
continue to just react (instead of attack). We might not be able to
predict the winners, but so long as there are radios, we'll always know
how the stages will play-out.

Boring.

Quoted message said:

The radios suck, and make bike racing so f'ing boring now. Instead of
being able to watch real winners go on the attack, we get to see Floyd
"monitor" the progress of the two guys up the road. The guy who wins
the TDF is the guy who can climb well, but has the best radio updates.

Dumbass -

You've got your head up your ass.

The radios make the sprint stages boring, but in today's mountain stage
the GC contenders were not concerned with what the breakaway was doing.
They were racing each other, not the breakaway, and rightfully so.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

trg said:

"shane" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...
| It seemed strange to me that Landis didnt get more time on them. This
| could be the reason why. Or perhaps he's just only a bit better than
| everyone else, but that bit is enough. I think he made 2 attacks up the
| summit, not sure if he could have been more aggresive, i was listening
| to the eurosport feed. Perhaps he was worried about tomorrow..
|
|
|
| [email hidden] wrote:
| > The radios suck, and make bike racing so f'ing boring now. Instead of
| > being able to watch real winners go on the attack, we get to see Floyd
| > "monitor" the progress of the two guys up the road. The guy who wins
| > the TDF is the guy who can climb well, but has the best radio updates.
| >
| > So big deal. Landis came in slightly ahead of Kloden. He could have
| > taken the lead back with gusto...And he could have put a significant
| > time gap into his closest rival if he wanted to.
| >
|

Landis climbed l'Alpe d'Huez in the same time as Armstrong in 2001, (which
was 2 minutes faster than Ullrich's time. and 30 second short of Pantani's
record time)

Maybe he was fresh out of gusto.

Au contraire:
37'35 - Marco Pantani, 1997 (fastest)
38'01 - Lance Armstrong, 2001
39'45 - Miguel Indurain, 1991
41'50 - Laurent Fignon, 1989
48'00 - Bernard Hinault/Greg Lemond, 1986

I believe today's ascent was 41' - putting it well within the "pre-EPO"
time of the Lemond era.

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

trg said:

"shane" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...
| It seemed strange to me that Landis didnt get more time on them. This
| could be the reason why. Or perhaps he's just only a bit better than
| everyone else, but that bit is enough. I think he made 2 attacks up the
| summit, not sure if he could have been more aggresive, i was listening
| to the eurosport feed. Perhaps he was worried about tomorrow..
|
|
|
| [email hidden] wrote:
| > The radios suck, and make bike racing so f'ing boring now. Instead of
| > being able to watch real winners go on the attack, we get to see Floyd
| > "monitor" the progress of the two guys up the road. The guy who wins
| > the TDF is the guy who can climb well, but has the best radio updates.
| >
| > So big deal. Landis came in slightly ahead of Kloden. He could have
| > taken the lead back with gusto...And he could have put a significant
| > time gap into his closest rival if he wanted to.
| >
|

Landis climbed l'Alpe d'Huez in the same time as Armstrong in 2001, (which
was 2 minutes faster than Ullrich's time. and 30 second short of Pantani's
record time)

Maybe he was fresh out of gusto.

Au contraire:
37'35 - Marco Pantani, 1997 (fastest)
38'01 - Lance Armstrong, 2001
39'45 - Miguel Indurain, 1991
41'50 - Laurent Fignon, 1989
48'00 - Bernard Hinault/Greg Lemond, 1986

I believe today's ascent was 41' - putting it well within the "pre-EPO"
time of the Lemond era.

The commentators on TV in France and England said Landis went up it in the
same time as Armstrong. Is the 41' Landis/Kloden's time, or Schleck's?

yeahyeah said:

trg said:

Landis climbed l'Alpe d'Huez in the same time as Armstrong in 2001, (which
was 2 minutes faster than Ullrich's time. and 30 second short of Pantani's
record time)

Maybe he was fresh out of gusto.

Au contraire:
37'35 - Marco Pantani, 1997 (fastest)
38'01 - Lance Armstrong, 2001
39'45 - Miguel Indurain, 1991
41'50 - Laurent Fignon, 1989
48'00 - Bernard Hinault/Greg Lemond, 1986

I believe today's ascent was 41' - putting it well within the "pre-EPO"
time of the Lemond era.

Cyclingnews suggested Schleck did it in 41 minutes, but
Landis and Kloden took 39 minutes - which is about right
if Schleck had a 3 minute advantage at the base and 1 minute
at the top. However, if you compare to the 2001 stage, in 2001
it was a 209 km stage with 1 cat 3 and 3 HC climbs (the Col du
Madeleine, Col du Glandon, and l'Alpe) and took over 6 hours.
Today's stage was 187 km with 1 cat 2 and only 2 HC climbs
and took just under 5 hours. (Yes, I am a geek and looked up
the profiles and times on cyclingnews.)

So it looks like the 2006 stage was significantly easier than
2001, which is why it is hard to cross-compare times.
Still Floyd and Kloden's time was fast enough that, though they
weren't extraterrestrial, nobody should accuse them of loafing.

Ben
loafing

Quoted message said:

yeahyeah said:

trg said:

Landis climbed l'Alpe d'Huez in the same time as Armstrong in 2001, (which
was 2 minutes faster than Ullrich's time. and 30 second short of Pantani's
record time)

Maybe he was fresh out of gusto.

Au contraire:
37'35 - Marco Pantani, 1997 (fastest)
38'01 - Lance Armstrong, 2001
39'45 - Miguel Indurain, 1991
41'50 - Laurent Fignon, 1989
48'00 - Bernard Hinault/Greg Lemond, 1986

I believe today's ascent was 41' - putting it well within the "pre-EPO"
time of the Lemond era.

Cyclingnews suggested Schleck did it in 41 minutes, but
Landis and Kloden took 39 minutes - which is about right
if Schleck had a 3 minute advantage at the base and 1 minute
at the top. However, if you compare to the 2001 stage, in 2001
it was a 209 km stage with 1 cat 3 and 3 HC climbs (the Col du
Madeleine, Col du Glandon, and l'Alpe) and took over 6 hours.
Today's stage was 187 km with 1 cat 2 and only 2 HC climbs
and took just under 5 hours. (Yes, I am a geek and looked up
the profiles and times on cyclingnews.)

So it looks like the 2006 stage was significantly easier than
2001, which is why it is hard to cross-compare times.
Still Floyd and Kloden's time was fast enough that, though they
weren't extraterrestrial, nobody should accuse them of loafing.

Ben
loafing

I must have misunderstood the 41' thing...
I realize radios can make flat/transitional stages utterly
mind-numbingly dull, but i can't see how a radio will make you climb
faster - unless it's some sort of magic radio that provides stimulus to
your leg muscles.

"shane" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...
| It seemed strange to me that Landis didnt get more time on them. This
| could be the reason why. Or perhaps he's just only a bit better than
| everyone else, but that bit is enough. I think he made 2 attacks up the
| summit, not sure if he could have been more aggresive, i was listening
| to the eurosport feed. Perhaps he was worried about tomorrow..
|
|
|
| [email hidden] wrote:
| > The radios suck, and make bike racing so f'ing boring now. Instead of
| > being able to watch real winners go on the attack, we get to see Floyd
| > "monitor" the progress of the two guys up the road. The guy who wins
| > the TDF is the guy who can climb well, but has the best radio updates.
| >
| > So big deal. Landis came in slightly ahead of Kloden. He could have
| > taken the lead back with gusto...And he could have put a significant
| > time gap into his closest rival if he wanted to.
| >
|

BTW, Landis said that his hip hurts most after 3 or 4 hours on the bike, and
when he's out of the saddle. That and the hard stage coming up tomorrow
might have also had an effect.

Quoted message said:

Cyclingnews suggested Schleck did it in 41 minutes, but
Landis and Kloden took 39 minutes - which is about right

Oh no according to the Lafferty Singlespeed Dogma that means that the
doping hasn't ended.

photoshoppper said:

Quoted message said:

The radios suck, and make bike racing so f'ing boring now.

Scott said:

I've read a number of your posts over the past few days, and I have a
couple of questions:

1) what are you so mad about? Everything seems to [censored] you off.

1] Steroids or
2] Adobe forcing him to use Windoze with Photoshop or
3] Both the above ?

Bob Schwartz said:

If you got rid of the radios he'd still be able to monitor the
two guys up the road. To prevent that you'd have to get rid of
this guy:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2005/tour05/?id=features/tour_moto/hk_3

The slater is more to make things fair for the guys further up the
road. For the chasers/field all that's needed is someone on the side
of the road you trust giving the gap.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
The radios suck, and make bike racing so f'ing boring now. Instead of
being able to watch real winners go on the attack, we get to see Floyd
"monitor" the progress of the two guys up the road. The guy who wins
the TDF is the guy who can climb well, but has the best radio updates.

Most people are aware that this habit began with LeMond whose DS had a
portable TV in the car and would monitor the rest as they do today. It just
took another teammate or two to be dropping back to get messages to carry
forward.

Now somehow you believe that this has to do with the radios which in fact
allow MORE gc guys to compete since they don't have to have the teammates
handy to transfer messages.

My guess is that you aren't bright enough to understand anything about
tactics and you have the idea that attacking is the way to win. My
suggestion is not to run your own career in that manner.

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

Quoted message said:

It seemed strange to me that Landis didnt get more time on them.

It shouldn't. It leaves Pereiro and Caisse d'Epargne-Illes Balears with a
horse in this race and gains Floyd a team with something to lose if they
play around.

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

Quoted message said:

Landis climbed l'Alpe d'Huez in the same time as Armstrong in 2001, (which
was 2 minutes faster than Ullrich's time. and 30 second short of Pantani's
record time)

Maybe he was fresh out of gusto.

Plainly he had to be doping as per the Laff@me strategy that says that
anyone that climbs faster than Brian Lafferty MUST be using drugs.