31 seconds covers the podium

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.

The fast end of the bell curve has been pruned off. Maybe Jeannie Longo
could have won this year.

The more interesting question:

Is this a small enough difference for Evans to give it a go on Sunday?

My guess is yes, but that Disco will be able to shut down the possible
moves too easily.

I would bet on every sprint point being contested by Evans and
Leipheimer, though.

Is it likely there will be any wind on the course tomorrow?

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

Quoted message said:

If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.

Since the winner was pulled from the race should Leipheimer claim the
winner's time bonus on the Aubisque?
That would make the GC even tighter.

DR

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

Quoted message said:

If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.

On the other hand, if there hadn't been bonuses, the GC of 1932 would have
been:

1. Leducq
2. Stoepel 0'04"
3. Camusso 0'21"

Benjo

DirtRoadie said:

Quoted message said:

If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.

Quoted message said:

Since the winner was pulled from the race should Leipheimer claim the
winner's time bonus on the Aubisque?

Michael Rasmussen is still the winner of stage 16, even if he gets a
third warning for not beeing in Mexico. If he gets a third warning it
will lead to a diciplinary case in witch he can get a 3 -12 months
quarenteene. A third warning will not lead to a doping case. Those are
the rules of WADA, witch funny enough are the rules that ASO says they
want's to follow.

Compare it to a soccer game. A player scores a goal, later in the game
the player gets a red card for foul play and no more goals are scored.
The team with who scored the goal wins the game by 1:0. That is how a
sporting event works.

Up until today when ASO publicied that they are leaving UCI, they
where bound by the laws of UCI and CAS. From now on they don't have to
follow other rules than civil law. Now, If they want to they could
give Sylvian Chavanel a 3 hours time bonus for having the nicest
haircut or the cutest turtle.

Up until yesterday TDF was a sporting event, in the future its a
showbuiz event like World Wrestling, the Oscars or a Beatles concert..

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...
| If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
| to cover the podium spots.
|

Would have even smaller if Leipheimer hadn't received a 10 second penalty
for a bidon pull in stage 8.

Tom Grosman said:

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...
| If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
| to cover the podium spots.
|

Would have even smaller if Leipheimer hadn't received a 10 second penalty
for a bidon pull in stage 8.

And if Leipheimer hadn't gotten the bidon pull, the gaap
might have been larger. OTOH, if he hadn't punctured, he
might not have needed the bidon pull. And if Evans hadn't
broken his collarbone so many times, his shoulder might
not have a lump and his CdA might be 0.0001 smaller.

At the very end of stage 16 on the Col d'Aubisque, Disco
let Leipheimer ride away from Contador to put time on Evans.
He had a 9 sec gap on Contador plus 4 sec in time bonuses
(12 sec for LL, 8 for AC). At the time it seemed like an
odd choice, and it still does a little. It turned out
not to make any difference, but very close.

Ben

Morten Reippuert Knudsen said:

DirtRoadie said:

Quoted message said:

If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.

Since the winner was pulled from the race should Leipheimer claim the
winner's time bonus on the Aubisque?

Michael Rasmussen is still the winner of stage 16, even if he gets a
third warning for not beeing in Mexico. If he gets a third warning it
will lead to a diciplinary case in witch he can get a 3 -12 months
quarenteene. A third warning will not lead to a doping case. Those are
the rules of WADA, witch funny enough are the rules that ASO says they
want's to follow.

Compare it to a soccer game. A player scores a goal, later in the game
the player gets a red card for foul play and no more goals are scored.
The team with who scored the goal wins the game by 1:0. That is how a
sporting event works.

Up until today when ASO publicied that they are leaving UCI, they
where bound by the laws of UCI and CAS. From now on they don't have to
follow other rules than civil law. Now, If they want to they could
give Sylvian Chavanel a 3 hours time bonus for having the nicest
haircut or the cutest turtle.

Up until yesterday TDF was a sporting event, in the future its a
showbuiz event like World Wrestling, the Oscars or a Beatles concert..

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

How many other lucrative pro sports are controlled by an amateur
organization the way the UCI controls pro cycling? I dont see
NBA,MLB,Soccer, etc getting slapped around by everyone else the way
the UCI does, and these sports have their problems too..

If ASO,RCS and unipublic get together, they have most of the very top
races except for Flanders. They can set up a league no problem...this
isnt indy cars

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

Quoted message said:

Morten Reippuert Knudsen said:

DirtRoadie said:

On Jul 28, 11:01 am, [email hidden] wrote:
> If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
> to cover the podium spots.
Since the winner was pulled from the race should Leipheimer claim the
winner's time bonus on the Aubisque?

Michael Rasmussen is still the winner of stage 16, even if he gets a
third warning for not beeing in Mexico. If he gets a third warning it
will lead to a diciplinary case in witch he can get a 3 -12 months
quarenteene. A third warning will not lead to a doping case. Those are
the rules of WADA, witch funny enough are the rules that ASO says they
want's to follow.

Compare it to a soccer game. A player scores a goal, later in the game
the player gets a red card for foul play and no more goals are scored.
The team with who scored the goal wins the game by 1:0. That is how a
sporting event works.

Up until today when ASO publicied that they are leaving UCI, they
where bound by the laws of UCI and CAS. From now on they don't have to
follow other rules than civil law. Now, If they want to they could
give Sylvian Chavanel a 3 hours time bonus for having the nicest
haircut or the cutest turtle.

Up until yesterday TDF was a sporting event, in the future its a
showbuiz event like World Wrestling, the Oscars or a Beatles concert..

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

How many other lucrative pro sports are controlled by an amateur
organization the way the UCI controls pro cycling? I dont see
NBA,MLB,Soccer, etc getting slapped around by everyone else the way
the UCI does, and these sports have their problems too..

If ASO,RCS and unipublic get together, they have most of the very top
races except for Flanders. They can set up a league no problem...this
isnt indy cars

Which was exactly the way it was going a few decades ago, the time that the
highest authority in the cycling world did not rest with the federations but
with the organizers of the most important races. In those days the UCI had
almost nothing to say and did exactly what Goddet and Lévitan (TdF,
P-Roubaix, P-Tours) with their croonies from the Gazetta dello Sport (Giro,
Milan-San Remo and Lombardia), Sportwereld (Flandres) and Les Sport
(P-Bruxelles, LBL, Fl. Wallone) told them to do. It couldn't be better (for
the organizers anyway), but it all changed when the authorities started
their anti-doping politics. Soccer, tennis, etc.all had a strong central
body to protect itself against outside intervention, but the UCI, poorly
organized and having few connections in political circles, made cycling like
a sitting duck. Which IMO is exactly the reason why the plans of the ASO
will have little effect. It won't be too difficult to win a power struggle
against the UCI, but the organizers of the top races are even more exposed
to the whims of the policital authorities than they were in the 1960's. The
French government would never have dared to close down the Tour after
Simpson's dead or even after the Festina scandal. But right now? I'm afraid
a lot of Frenchmen would be quite happy.

Benjo

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
benjo maso <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

The French government would
never have dared to close down the Tour after Simpson's dead or even
after the Festina scandal. But right now? I'm afraid a lot of
Frenchmen would be quite happy.
Benjo

It's rare for me to find disagreement with you, but I have an opposite view.
The government is so intent on imposing and superimposing order, they could
find this an opportunity, not a bundle of trash to be disposed of.

A second, larger reason is the usual one - money. Tourism is the second
industry in France (after bureaucracy - no kidding), and the event(s) do
much more for the treasury than something like Roland Garros. The fatted
calf has a long life to live.
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

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

Quoted message said:

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
benjo maso <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

The French government would
never have dared to close down the Tour after Simpson's dead or even
after the Festina scandal. But right now? I'm afraid a lot of
Frenchmen would be quite happy.
Benjo

It's rare for me to find disagreement with you, but I have an opposite
view. The government is so intent on imposing and superimposing order,
they could find this an opportunity, not a bundle of trash to be disposed
of.

A second, larger reason is the usual one - money. Tourism is the second
industry in France (after bureaucracy - no kidding), and the event(s) do
much more for the treasury than something like Roland Garros. The fatted
calf has a long life to live.

I probably expressed myself poorly. I certainly don't think the French
government is going to close down the Tour shortly - I happened to be
interviewed today on some radio program, and I said that IMO the Tour would
be pretty safe for the next ten or twenty years. On the other hand, I
wouldn't be surprised if the rot is setting in.

Benjo

shane said:

How many other lucrative pro sports are controlled by an amateur
organization the way the UCI controls pro cycling? I dont see
NBA,MLB,Soccer, etc getting slapped around by everyone else the way
the UCI does, and these sports have their problems too..

Dunno about the american sports but as i recall fotball, hokey
baseball and hokey are all purely comercial. As for baseeball and
Football no global or even national amateur organisations exists.
Athleets are recuted through highscools and college, Those sports are
only execiced by kids and elite athleestes. Once out of highscool or
college athletes who don't turn pro stop exercicing their sport. Am i
correct?

Soccer and the majoreity of european sports are all controled by an
amteur organisation. The most powerfull, welthiest and most
successfull regional soccer organisation, UFEA, is defenatly an
ameteur organisation with a hiracical repressentation founded en
amateur clubs as members of a national federation. Just like the UCI.

Never the less a similar confilct between the 12 wealtiest soccer club
somtimes errupts between them and UEFA, and they have threadned to
leave UFEA and go "america" på forming a pure commercial leauge on
their own. Champions League is a very successfull compromise, and the
protour is an attemt to do the same thing in cycling, however ASO and
especcialle TDF is way bigger and gnerates way more revenues than any
other event in cycling. Now ASO seems to think they can pull off a
seperation without infliction too much damage to their own product..

The relationship between ASO and UCI has reached a level of paranoia,
especially on the ASO side.
ASO refuses to talk to Pat McQaid. They are accusiong him to be
Hein Verbrugge's puppet, eg. implying that even though Verbrugge is no
longer a UCI official he is still behind every decission taken by the
UCI.

The really interresting part comes here: Verbrugge left UCI arround
2 years ago after forming the protour with the concent of ASO.
After he left UCI he was part of a large consortium who tried to buy
the ASO. After that ASO started their war against UCI's prootour
because they think that the protour was created by Verbrugge with the
single purpose to control ASO.

So, we are stuck with a conflict where ASO doesn't want to talk to
UCI's president because they say he is not really in power. They won't
talk to Verbrugge and even if they did it won't help because he is not
UCI and he does not have the authority to act on behalf of UCI.

Durring the last 3 weeks ASO has managed to blame UCI for beeing
responsible for everything wrong in cycling, even though they are co-
responsible and they themselves have blocked every attemt to come up
with a soloution. TDF is not the victim here, ther riders are the only
victims.

Now the ASO claims that the can fix whats wrong on the administrative
level and that they can emliminate doping. The truth is that they may
be able to eliminate some of the administartive bureaucracy, but doing
so will be on expence of being a democratic orgianisation as UCI is.
Regarding doping in cycling i belive that UCI has a more sencire wish
to minimize dopeing among the athletes because UCI are acting on behalf
on the atletes (pro, elite and amaturs). A professional ASO
organisation only has to answar to the owners, in this case a company
and its shareholders. Their fight against doping will be very visible
but not neccesarily efficint. Their main priority will be to show that
they are doing something, not to really do somathing. It'l be a
showoff just like antidoping in the commercial american sports.

Quoted message said:

If ASO,RCS and unipublic get together, they have most of the very top
races except for Flanders. They can set up a league no problem...this
isnt indy cars

I'm well aware of that, but it wont be sport. It will be showbuiz, and
it wont fix anything.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

benjo maso said:

Which was exactly the way it was going a few decades ago, the time that the
highest authority in the cycling world did not rest with the federations but
with the organizers of the most important races. In those days the UCI had
almost nothing to say and did exactly what Goddet and Lévitan (TdF,
P-Roubaix, P-Tours) with their croonies from the Gazetta dello Sport (Giro,
Milan-San Remo and Lombardia), Sportwereld (Flandres) and Les Sport
(P-Bruxelles, LBL, Fl. Wallone) told them to do. It couldn't be better (for
the organizers anyway), but it all changed when the authorities started
their anti-doping politics. Soccer, tennis, etc.all had a strong central
body to protect itself against outside intervention, but the UCI, poorly
organized and having few connections in political circles, made cycling like
a sitting duck. Which IMO is exactly the reason why the plans of the ASO
will have little effect. It won't be too difficult to win a power struggle
against the UCI, but the organizers of the top races are even more exposed
to the whims of the policital authorities than they were in the 1960's. The
French government would never have dared to close down the Tour after
Simpson's dead or even after the Festina scandal. But right now? I'm afraid
a lot of Frenchmen would be quite happy.

Speaking of doping, a return to the old days where the race organizers
decides everything it will be even harder to clean up cycling.
Remember that the doping in cycling have their root in the old system
(pre acting UCI).

A model where the organizers has to apply to the rules decided by a global
federation, rooted in national federations with individual clumbs and
their members is the only way to enforce an efficint antidpoing
system.

An antipoding program model with independant organisers dictated by
revenues will be a showoff antidoping program. It might keep the press
and the politicians away but it won't fix anything. This is the model
ASO will implement.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 02:51:47 +0200, Morten Reippuert

Knudsen said:

As for baseeball and
Football no global or even national amateur organisations exists.

There is an international baseball federation (IBAF) and has been
since before WW2. Of course, they have no control over professional
baseball in any country. They sponsor the baseball world cup and
other torrnaments. The were co-sponsors with MLB of the World
Baseball Classic last year.

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Ryan Cousineau said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.

The fast end of the bell curve has been pruned off. Maybe Jeannie Longo
could have won this year.

The more interesting question:

Is this a small enough difference for Evans to give it a go on Sunday?

My guess is yes, but that Disco will be able to shut down the possible
moves too easily.

I would bet on every sprint point being contested by Evans and
Leipheimer, though.

Is it likely there will be any wind on the course tomorrow?

If Evans contests it he is in greater danger of his
twelve seconds evaporating.

--
Michael Press

in message <[email hidden]>, Morten Reippuert Knudsen

(') said:

DirtRoadie said:

Quoted message said:

If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.

Quoted message said:

Since the winner was pulled from the race should Leipheimer claim the
winner's time bonus on the Aubisque?

Michael Rasmussen is still the winner of stage 16, even if he gets a
third warning for not beeing in Mexico. If he gets a third warning it
will lead to a diciplinary case in witch he can get a 3 -12 months
quarenteene. A third warning will not lead to a doping case. Those are
the rules of WADA, witch funny enough are the rules that ASO says they
want's to follow.

Compare it to a soccer game. A player scores a goal, later in the game
the player gets a red card for foul play and no more goals are scored.
The team with who scored the goal wins the game by 1:0. That is how a
sporting event works.

Rasmussen didn't get a red card. He was dismissed from his team, not
expelled from the tour by a referee/commissaire. He hasn't - yet - been
accused of anything for which he could have been expelled from the tour.

Quoted message said:

Up until yesterday TDF was a sporting event, in the future its a
showbuiz event like World Wrestling, the Oscars or a Beatles concert..

Actually, if you were to ask me whether I would prefer to trust the ASO or
the UCI to run a sporting event...

Damn, that's hard!

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

;; single speed mountain bikes: for people who cycle on flat mountains.

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

Quoted message said:

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
benjo maso <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

The French government would
never have dared to close down the Tour after Simpson's dead or even
after the Festina scandal. But right now? I'm afraid a lot of
Frenchmen would be quite happy.
Benjo

It's rare for me to find disagreement with you, but I have an opposite
view. The government is so intent on imposing and superimposing order,
they could find this an opportunity, not a bundle of trash to be disposed
of.

A second, larger reason is the usual one - money. Tourism is the second
industry in France (after bureaucracy - no kidding), and the event(s) do
much more for the treasury than something like Roland Garros. The fatted
calf has a long life to live.
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

Sandy,

I read some where that it was the intention of the French authority to
declare the tour some kind of "National institution" (I don't remember the
correct expression).
ASO knows very well to have the support of the French authority, and Sarko
in particular. Reason for what Patrice Clerc dare to defy UCI.
As you said the Tour is for France one of his most important display,
millions of tourist, news in the media, reports aso.
Then, the TDF is so popular among the French and no-french since more than
100 years that the French authority will never accept the death of the Tour.
What some jornalist fail to understand is that the Tour is 90 % a popular
fest and only 10 % a sportive event.
There were 2 millions in London ( If I am not mistaken) : Do we believe
there were 2 millions of cyclist fans ? Of course no.

Morten Reippuert Knudsen said:

shane said:

How many other lucrative pro sports are controlled by an amateur
organization the way the UCI controls pro cycling? I dont see
NBA,MLB,Soccer, etc getting slapped around by everyone else the way
the UCI does, and these sports have their problems too..

Dunno about the american sports but as i recall fotball, hokey
baseball and hokey are all purely comercial. As for baseeball and
Football no global or even national amateur organisations exists.
Athleets are recuted through highscools and college, Those sports are
only execiced by kids and elite athleestes. Once out of highscool or
college athletes who don't turn pro stop exercicing their sport. Am i
correct?

Soccer and the majoreity of european sports are all controled by an
amteur organisation. The most powerfull, welthiest and most
successfull regional soccer organisation, UFEA, is defenatly an
ameteur organisation with a hiracical repressentation founded en
amateur clubs as members of a national federation. Just like the UCI.

Never the less a similar confilct between the 12 wealtiest soccer club
somtimes errupts between them and UEFA, and they have threadned to
leave UFEA and go "america" på forming a pure commercial leauge on
their own. Champions League is a very successfull compromise, and the
protour is an attemt to do the same thing in cycling, however ASO and
especcialle TDF is way bigger and gnerates way more revenues than any
other event in cycling. Now ASO seems to think they can pull off a
seperation without infliction too much damage to their own product..

The relationship between ASO and UCI has reached a level of paranoia,
especially on the ASO side.
ASO refuses to talk to Pat McQaid. They are accusiong him to be
Hein Verbrugge's puppet, eg. implying that even though Verbrugge is no
longer a UCI official he is still behind every decission taken by the
UCI.

The really interresting part comes here: Verbrugge left UCI arround
2 years ago after forming the protour with the concent of ASO.
After he left UCI he was part of a large consortium who tried to buy
the ASO. After that ASO started their war against UCI's prootour
because they think that the protour was created by Verbrugge with the
single purpose to control ASO.

So, we are stuck with a conflict where ASO doesn't want to talk to
UCI's president because they say he is not really in power. They won't
talk to Verbrugge and even if they did it won't help because he is not
UCI and he does not have the authority to act on behalf of UCI.

Durring the last 3 weeks ASO has managed to blame UCI for beeing
responsible for everything wrong in cycling, even though they are co-
responsible and they themselves have blocked every attemt to come up
with a soloution. TDF is not the victim here, ther riders are the only
victims.

Now the ASO claims that the can fix whats wrong on the administrative
level and that they can emliminate doping. The truth is that they may
be able to eliminate some of the administartive bureaucracy, but doing
so will be on expence of being a democratic orgianisation as UCI is.
Regarding doping in cycling i belive that UCI has a more sencire wish
to minimize dopeing among the athletes because UCI are acting on behalf
on the atletes (pro, elite and amaturs). A professional ASO
organisation only has to answar to the owners, in this case a company
and its shareholders. Their fight against doping will be very visible
but not neccesarily efficint. Their main priority will be to show that
they are doing something, not to really do somathing. It'l be a
showoff just like antidoping in the commercial american sports.

Quoted message said:

If ASO,RCS and unipublic get together, they have most of the very top
races except for Flanders. They can set up a league no problem...this
isnt indy cars

I'm well aware of that, but it wont be sport. It will be showbuiz, and
it wont fix anything.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

Thanks for the history lesson Morten, it makes this whole mess make a
bit more sense.

Unfortunately, theres needs to be a balance between cleaning the sport
and protecting the image of the sport (even though its kind of a
conflict). It seems to me that the UCI is cleaning the sport,but not
caring about the business aspect of it. Operation Puerto is an example
that comes to mind, where the press only focuses on the cyclists and
no other athletes. It doesnt seem to me that the UCI is capable of
protecting the sport as a business. Has the Pro Tour really
accomplished anything positive? A clean sport is great , but if in the
process theres no athletes or fans left, was it worth it?

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Morten Reippuert Knudsen
([email hidden]'😉 wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

DirtRoadie said:

On Jul 28, 11:01 am, [email hidden] wrote:
> If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
> to cover the podium spots.

Quoted message said:

Since the winner was pulled from the race should Leipheimer claim the
winner's time bonus on the Aubisque?

Michael Rasmussen is still the winner of stage 16, even if he gets a
third warning for not beeing in Mexico. If he gets a third warning it
will lead to a diciplinary case in witch he can get a 3 -12 months
quarenteene. A third warning will not lead to a doping case. Those are
the rules of WADA, witch funny enough are the rules that ASO says they
want's to follow.

Compare it to a soccer game. A player scores a goal, later in the game
the player gets a red card for foul play and no more goals are scored.
The team with who scored the goal wins the game by 1:0. That is how a
sporting event works.

Quoted message said:

Rasmussen didn't get a red card. He was dismissed from his team, not
expelled from the tour by a referee/commissaire. He hasn't - yet - been
accused of anything for which he could have been expelled from the tour.

I know, i used it as an extreme example to explain why the results of
stage 16 stands.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Up until yesterday TDF was a sporting event, in the future its a
showbuiz event like World Wrestling, the Oscars or a Beatles concert..

Quoted message said:

Actually, if you were to ask me whether I would prefer to trust the ASO or
the UCI to run a sporting event...

I'd trust the organisation witch is democratic in it's foundation and
is willing to follow their own rules and the rules of sport, even
thoug they might not alwas like them.

Quoted message said:

Damn, that's hard!

not relly

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

Montesquiou said:

I read some where that it was the intention of the French authority to
declare the tour some kind of "National institution" (I don't remember the
correct expression).
ASO knows very well to have the support of the French authority, and Sarko
in particular. Reason for what Patrice Clerc dare to defy UCI.
As you said the Tour is for France one of his most important display,
millions of tourist, news in the media, reports aso.
Then, the TDF is so popular among the French and no-french since more than
100 years that the French authority will never accept the death of the Tour.
What some jornalist fail to understand is that the Tour is 90 % a popular
fest and only 10 % a sportive event.
There were 2 millions in London ( If I am not mistaken) : Do we believe
there were 2 millions of cyclist fans ? Of course no.

So your are saying that the TDF is better off being a showbuiz event
than a sporting event? I tend to agree on that, but it won't be better
for cycling as a sport. And it certainly won't reduce the usage of
doping among the cyclists in TDF since ASO won't have a reason to do
so, their main objective will be make it look like they are doing an
awfull lot and avoyd scandals (aka covering up).

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.