Road Cycling · Public discussion

Re: purpose?

Started by Email address hidden · · Last activity · 5 posts · 289 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Road Cycling
Published
4 September 2006
Last activity
5 September 2006
Original author
Email address hidden
Posts
5
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
289
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–5 of 5
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. MagillaGorilla said:

    Other sports likewise assign sponsors to these extra-curricular
    competitions as well. However, they are smart enough to call them what
    they are - statistics. No athlete shows up to tournaments or Superbowls
    or a World Series with the intent to mold their entire game of play
    strategy to win STATISTICS at the expense of losing the overall win.

    Riders like Robbie McEwen win statistics, not races. What Robbie McEwen
    does in the Tour de France is akin to a running back gaining the most
    yards in a game despite his team losing.

    Robbie McEwen is not winning statistics at the expense
    of losing the overall win. I'm fairly sure McEwen has no
    chance at the overall Tour win. Nor does anyone else
    on his team, usually.

    Cycling is a team sport that is also an individual sport.
    That is one reason why its strategies are different from
    either baseball or (for ex) distance running. Cycling
    is also one of the few team sports where the courses
    change from event to event - football fields are more
    or less the same apart from wind and altitude; baseball
    fields have minor differences in the outfield; soccer pitches
    vary in size but they don't put hills in the middle, and so on.
    In fact I can't think of another team sport that uses varied
    courses, though surely someone will come up with one
    (Relay XC skiing doesn't count).

    McEwen can't win the Tour and Basso has little shot at
    winning many of the major classics. Imagine if baseball
    stadia differed so much that which player performed well
    depended so strongly on the venue.

    The structural issues caused by cycling race courses being
    in all sorts of different places are a major reason that pro
    cycling has the screwed-up governing structure that it does,
    with promoters, the UCI, teams and sponsors all trying to
    satisfy their own interests. It's not just the usual UCI
    incompetence.

    Ben

  2. Quoted message said:
    MagillaGorilla said:

    Other sports likewise assign sponsors to these extra-curricular
    competitions as well. However, they are smart enough to call them what
    they are - statistics. No athlete shows up to tournaments or Superbowls
    or a World Series with the intent to mold their entire game of play
    strategy to win STATISTICS at the expense of losing the overall win.

    Riders like Robbie McEwen win statistics, not races. What Robbie McEwen
    does in the Tour de France is akin to a running back gaining the most
    yards in a game despite his team losing.

    Robbie McEwen is not winning statistics at the expense
    of losing the overall win. I'm fairly sure McEwen has no
    chance at the overall Tour win. Nor does anyone else
    on his team, usually.

    Teams shouldn't be allowed to compete in a Grand Tour unless they bring
    someone who can win the GC. Otherwise, you get these weirdo sprinter
    types who go for statistics and their entire team shows up AWOL to the
    actual event and rides for these statistics. This is like a baseball
    team showing up to a series to see if they can make the most bunts
    because they know they can't win the game. Or a basketball team showing
    up to the playoff and trying to make shots from beyond half court to see
    if it can make the longest shot in the game while intentionally losing
    the game.

    In all professional sports (except for cycling), everyone on the playing
    field has the same overall goal. It's mano v. mano.

    In cycling, it's like everyone has all these different agendas and it
    creates this bizarre "game" where every race has like 4 different
    "winners" (KOM, sprinter's jersey, most aggressive, best U-boat
    commander) - none of whom compete directly against the other riders or
    teams.

    It's stupid and it really needs to stop.

    Quoted message said:


    Cycling is a team sport that is also an individual sport.

    Wrong, it's just a team sport.

    Quoted message said:

    That is one reason why its strategies are different from
    either baseball or (for ex) distance running. Cycling
    is also one of the few team sports where the courses
    change from event to event - football fields are more
    or less the same apart from wind and altitude; baseball
    fields have minor differences in the outfield; soccer pitches
    vary in size but they don't put hills in the middle, and so on.
    In fact I can't think of another team sport that uses varied
    courses, though surely someone will come up with one
    (Relay XC skiing doesn't count).

    McEwen can't win the Tour and Basso has little shot at
    winning many of the major classics.

    Riders like McEwen shouldn't show up to the Tour de France. Let
    Leipheimer and Valverde sprint for time bonuses. It cracks me up how
    hyper Phil Liggett gets when he calls fields sprints in the Tour de
    France. All that hype for a guy who finishes 2 hours down on GC in Paris?

    Imagine if baseball

    Quoted message said:

    stadia differed so much that which player performed well
    depended so strongly on the venue.

    No, there will be no imagine this or that, John Lennon.

    'Grilla

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

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:


    Cycling is a team sport that is also an individual sport.

    Wrong, it's just a team sport.

    Then why does the President of the United States of America only call Lance
    & Floyd when they win and not the whole team? If it was only a team sport
    the President of the United States of America would call the whole team.

    When the 1996 New York Yankees, with Wade Boggs (but no Margo), won the
    World Series they all were invited to the White House to see the President
    of the United States of America

  4. Frank Drackman said:

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

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Cycling is a team sport that is also an individual sport.

    Wrong, it's just a team sport.

    Then why does the President of the United States of America only call Lance
    & Floyd when they win and not the whole team? If it was only a team sport
    the President of the United States of America would call the whole team.

    When the 1996 New York Yankees, with Wade Boggs (but no Margo), won the
    World Series they all were invited to the White House to see the President
    of the United States of America

    Clinton throated a plumper.

    Apeface

  5. MagillaGorilla said:
    Frank Drackman said:

    When the 1996 New York Yankees, with Wade Boggs (but no Margo), won the
    World Series they all were invited to the White House to see the President
    of the United States of America

    Clinton throated a plumper.

    Holy [censored], I never knew _that_ about Wade Boggs.

    Ben
    rethinking the secret history of the 90s

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.