If it were Eddy Merckx...

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

Quoted message said:

If it were Eddy Merckx instead of Lance, he'd rip that spotty jersey
off Virenque tomorrow.

I doubt it but it's too bad I could only hear about Eddy when he was racing
and that wasn't much. I think I can remember a 10 second spot on the news
about Eddy winning the Tour. That was the first time I have even heard about
the Tour. In fact they even had a little clip of the cannibal.

Quoted message said:

Mountains classification

1 Richard Virenque (Fra) Quick Step-Davitamon
177 pts
2 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal p/b Berry Floor
142

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

Quoted message said:

If it were Eddy Merckx instead of Lance, he'd rip that spotty jersey
off Virenque tomorrow.

Mountains classification

1 Richard Virenque (Fra) Quick Step-Davitamon
177 pts
2 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal p/b Berry Floor
142

In his first years as a professional Eddy took anything he could get, as he
did in the Tour of '69. But after "the cannibal' had won everything he
wasn't so hungry anymore. For instance, in '70 he sold the green jersey to
Godefroot. So I don't think he would ripped the polka dot jersey from
Virenque. He would have been satisfied with some euro's.

Benjo Maso

On 21 Jul 2004 12:04:27 -0700, [email hidden] (Richard Adams)

Quoted message said:

If it were Eddy Merckx instead of Lance, he'd rip that spotty jersey
off Virenque tomorrow.

He's already said he's worried about the drunk spectators.

Why would he [censored] the French like that ?

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

If it were Eddy Merckx instead of Lance, he'd rip that spotty jersey
off Virenque tomorrow.

Mountains classification

1 Richard Virenque (Fra) Quick Step-Davitamon
177 pts
2 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal p/b Berry Floor
142

In his first years as a professional Eddy took anything he could get, as

he

Quoted message said:

did in the Tour of '69. But after "the cannibal' had won everything he
wasn't so hungry anymore. For instance, in '70 he sold the green jersey to
Godefroot. So I don't think he would ripped the polka dot jersey from
Virenque. He would have been satisfied with some euro's.

Benjo Maso

Why is Coppi and Bartoli greater then Merckx according to some? Got just a
minute for your opinion? I've never heard it from you.

It is not Armstrong's style to take anything except the Yellow from another
racer. He has what he wants and now must keep it without any greed for
another color.
Ken

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

Quoted message said:

If it were Eddy Merckx instead of Lance, he'd rip that spotty jersey
off Virenque tomorrow.

Mountains classification

1 Richard Virenque (Fra) Quick Step-Davitamon
177 pts
2 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal p/b Berry Floor
142

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

If it were Eddy Merckx instead of Lance, he'd rip that spotty jersey
off Virenque tomorrow.

Mountains classification

1 Richard Virenque (Fra) Quick Step-Davitamon
177 pts
2 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal p/b Berry Floor
142

In his first years as a professional Eddy took anything he could get, as

he

Quoted message said:

did in the Tour of '69. But after "the cannibal' had won everything he
wasn't so hungry anymore. For instance, in '70 he sold the green jersey

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Godefroot. So I don't think he would ripped the polka dot jersey from
Virenque. He would have been satisfied with some euro's.

Benjo Maso

Why is Coppi and Bartoli greater then Merckx according to some? Got just a
minute for your opinion? I've never heard it from you.

I have heard three are two different reasons why Coppi was greater (I don't
think many people think that Bartali is surpassing Merckx):

1) According to Geminiani Coppi was the greatest, because he had to compete
with greater riders than Merckx: Poulidor, Zoetemelk and even Gimondi coudnt
compare to Bartali, Koblet, Bobet, Kübler and Magni. True, but not very
convincing. One could also argue that Merckx was so strong that he dwarfed
his rivals.

2) Jacques Goddet said once: Merckx is the best rider ever, but Coppi was
better. According to him Coppi was the greatest talent ever and only athlete
he had ever known who seemed to be made for the bicycle. Although Merckx won
twice as much as Coppi, Coppi's victories were - again according to Goddet -
pure works of art, never equalled, not even by Merckx.

3) The italian sport historian Gian Paolo Ormezzano wrote: Merckx was the
strongest, but Coppi the greatest. The opinions of Ormezzano and Goddet are
IMO only comprehensible if we accept that sport can be much more than just
being the fastest or the strongest and is also an important cultural
phenomenon. It can go for any sport of course, but never more than for
bicycle racing on the road in general and the Tour of the Giro in
particular. Or rather, in the 1940's and 1950's and before when legends and
myth were much stronger than reality. The main reason was of course that
before the introduction of television the public could see two seconds at
most and the journalists who followed the race only some fragments. Because
of that, a report of a race was almost literature: half fact, half fiction.
And of course much more sensational, stirring, moving, touching, dramatic,
etc. than prosaic reality. For instance, when Coppi made a breakaway of 100
km or more - as in the Giro of 1949 - a writer as Dino Buzzatti could give
it epic, homeric proportions. But that's impossible when everybody has seen
the race on television. When Merckx rode two hours alone in front, perhaps
viewers thought it was admirable, but they certainly found it very dull. In
the television era races racing needs monumental collapses, spectacular
falls, come-backs after being shot or having suffered from cancer to get
some of the same dramatic force which came almost natural in the area of
Coppi and Bartali.

Benjo Maso

Quoted message said:

From: "benjo maso" [email hidden]

Quoted message said:

I have heard three are two different reasons why Coppi was greater (I don't
think many people think that Bartali is surpassing Merckx):

1) According to Geminiani Coppi was the greatest, because he had to compete
with greater riders than Merckx: Poulidor, Zoetemelk and even Gimondi coudnt
compare to Bartali, Koblet, Bobet, Kübler and Magni. True, but not very
convincing. One could also argue that Merckx was so strong that he dwarfed
his rivals.

2) Jacques Goddet said once: Merckx is the best rider ever, but Coppi was
better. According to him Coppi was the greatest talent ever and only athlete
he had ever known who seemed to be made for the bicycle. Although Merckx won
twice as much as Coppi, Coppi's victories were - again according to Goddet -
pure works of art, never equalled, not even by Merckx.

3) The italian sport historian Gian Paolo Ormezzano wrote: Merckx was the
strongest, but Coppi the greatest. The opinions of Ormezzano and Goddet are
IMO only comprehensible if we accept that sport can be much more than just
being the fastest or the strongest and is also an important cultural
phenomenon. It can go for any sport of course, but never more than for
bicycle racing on the road in general and the Tour of the Giro in
particular. Or rather, in the 1940's and 1950's and before when legends and
myth were much stronger than reality. The main reason was of course that
before the introduction of television the public could see two seconds at
most and the journalists who followed the race only some fragments. Because
of that, a report of a race was almost literature: half fact, half fiction.
And of course much more sensational, stirring, moving, touching, dramatic,
etc. than prosaic reality. For instance, when Coppi made a breakaway of 100
km or more - as in the Giro of 1949 - a writer as Dino Buzzatti could give
it epic, homeric proportions. But that's impossible when everybody has seen
the race on television. When Merckx rode two hours alone in front, perhaps
viewers thought it was admirable, but they certainly found it very dull. In
the television era races racing needs monumental collapses, spectacular
falls, come-backs after being shot or having suffered from cancer to get
some of the same dramatic force which came almost natural in the area of
Coppi and Bartali.

Benjo Maso

Hall of Fame post
Bill C

benjo maso said:

3) The italian sport historian Gian Paolo Ormezzano wrote: Merckx was the
strongest, but Coppi the greatest. The opinions of Ormezzano and Goddet are
IMO only comprehensible if we accept that sport can be much more than just
being the fastest or the strongest and is also an important cultural
phenomenon. It can go for any sport of course, but never more than for
bicycle racing on the road in general and the Tour of the Giro in
particular. Or rather, in the 1940's and 1950's and before when legends and
myth were much stronger than reality. The main reason was of course that
before the introduction of television the public could see two seconds at
most and the journalists who followed the race only some fragments. Because
of that, a report of a race was almost literature: half fact, half fiction.
And of course much more sensational, stirring, moving, touching, dramatic,
etc. than prosaic reality. For instance, when Coppi made a breakaway of 100
km or more - as in the Giro of 1949 - a writer as Dino Buzzatti could give
it epic, homeric proportions. But that's impossible when everybody has seen
the race on television. When Merckx rode two hours alone in front, perhaps
viewers thought it was admirable, but they certainly found it very dull. In
the television era races racing needs monumental collapses, spectacular
falls, come-backs after being shot or having suffered from cancer to get
some of the same dramatic force which came almost natural in the area of
Coppi and Bartali.

Another fantastic post from Benjo. I just want to add that
Dino Buzzati's book on the Giro of 1949 was translated into
English and published by Velopress. You can get it from
Amazon or elsewhere:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/188473751X

I think it is one of the few books of cycling journalism from
that era that is easily available in English, at least in the U.S.

I also wonder if the context of the racing of the time - bad roads,
and hard conditions, slow emergence in the postwar era from the
poverty and destruction of the war - lent a heroic aura to the races
which in a more prosperous time become, as television, another mass
entertainment. Not that there's anything wrong with entertainment,
but it isn't usually epic.

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

"Richard Adams" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> If it were Eddy Merckx instead of Lance, he'd rip that spotty jersey
> off Virenque tomorrow.
>
> Mountains classification
>
> 1 Richard Virenque (Fra) Quick Step-Davitamon
> 177 pts
> 2 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal p/b Berry Floor
> 142

In his first years as a professional Eddy took anything he could get,

as

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

he

Quoted message said:

did in the Tour of '69. But after "the cannibal' had won everything he
wasn't so hungry anymore. For instance, in '70 he sold the green

jersey

Quoted message said:

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Godefroot. So I don't think he would ripped the polka dot jersey from
Virenque. He would have been satisfied with some euro's.

Benjo Maso

Why is Coppi and Bartoli greater then Merckx according to some? Got just

a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

minute for your opinion? I've never heard it from you.

I have heard three are two different reasons why Coppi was greater (I

don't

Quoted message said:

think many people think that Bartali is surpassing Merckx):

1) According to Geminiani Coppi was the greatest, because he had to

compete

Quoted message said:

with greater riders than Merckx: Poulidor, Zoetemelk and even Gimondi

coudnt

Quoted message said:

compare to Bartali, Koblet, Bobet, Kübler and Magni. True, but not very
convincing. One could also argue that Merckx was so strong that he dwarfed
his rivals.

2) Jacques Goddet said once: Merckx is the best rider ever, but Coppi was
better. According to him Coppi was the greatest talent ever and only

athlete

Quoted message said:

he had ever known who seemed to be made for the bicycle. Although Merckx

won

Quoted message said:

twice as much as Coppi, Coppi's victories were - again according to

Goddet -

Quoted message said:

pure works of art, never equalled, not even by Merckx.

3) The italian sport historian Gian Paolo Ormezzano wrote: Merckx was the
strongest, but Coppi the greatest. The opinions of Ormezzano and Goddet

are

Quoted message said:

IMO only comprehensible if we accept that sport can be much more than just
being the fastest or the strongest and is also an important cultural
phenomenon. It can go for any sport of course, but never more than for
bicycle racing on the road in general and the Tour of the Giro in
particular. Or rather, in the 1940's and 1950's and before when legends

and

Quoted message said:

myth were much stronger than reality. The main reason was of course that
before the introduction of television the public could see two seconds at
most and the journalists who followed the race only some fragments.

Because

Quoted message said:

of that, a report of a race was almost literature: half fact, half

fiction.

Quoted message said:

And of course much more sensational, stirring, moving, touching, dramatic,
etc. than prosaic reality. For instance, when Coppi made a breakaway of

100

Quoted message said:

km or more - as in the Giro of 1949 - a writer as Dino Buzzatti could give
it epic, homeric proportions. But that's impossible when everybody has

seen

Quoted message said:

the race on television. When Merckx rode two hours alone in front, perhaps
viewers thought it was admirable, but they certainly found it very dull.

In

Quoted message said:

the television era races racing needs monumental collapses, spectacular
falls, come-backs after being shot or having suffered from cancer to get
some of the same dramatic force which came almost natural in the area of
Coppi and Bartali.

Benjo Maso

Thank you sir, you are a gentleman.

Quoted message said:

From: "Sierraman"

Quoted message said:

Thank you sir, you are a gentleman.

Don't forget the "scholar" part. Joining thank you line. Thank you, Benjo. --TP

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

From: "benjo maso" [email hidden]

Quoted message said:

I have heard three are two different reasons why Coppi was greater (I

don't

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

think many people think that Bartali is surpassing Merckx):

1) According to Geminiani Coppi was the greatest, because he had to

compete

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

with greater riders than Merckx: Poulidor, Zoetemelk and even Gimondi

coudnt

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

compare to Bartali, Koblet, Bobet, Kübler and Magni. True, but not very
convincing. One could also argue that Merckx was so strong that he

dwarfed

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

his rivals.

2) Jacques Goddet said once: Merckx is the best rider ever, but Coppi was
better. According to him Coppi was the greatest talent ever and only

athlete

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

he had ever known who seemed to be made for the bicycle. Although Merckx

won

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

twice as much as Coppi, Coppi's victories were - again according to

Goddet -

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

pure works of art, never equalled, not even by Merckx.

3) The italian sport historian Gian Paolo Ormezzano wrote: Merckx was the
strongest, but Coppi the greatest. The opinions of Ormezzano and Goddet

are

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

IMO only comprehensible if we accept that sport can be much more than

just

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

being the fastest or the strongest and is also an important cultural
phenomenon. It can go for any sport of course, but never more than for
bicycle racing on the road in general and the Tour of the Giro in
particular. Or rather, in the 1940's and 1950's and before when legends

and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

myth were much stronger than reality. The main reason was of course that
before the introduction of television the public could see two seconds at
most and the journalists who followed the race only some fragments.

Because

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

of that, a report of a race was almost literature: half fact, half

fiction.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And of course much more sensational, stirring, moving, touching,

dramatic,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

etc. than prosaic reality. For instance, when Coppi made a breakaway of

100

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

km or more - as in the Giro of 1949 - a writer as Dino Buzzatti could

give

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it epic, homeric proportions. But that's impossible when everybody has

seen

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the race on television. When Merckx rode two hours alone in front,

perhaps

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

viewers thought it was admirable, but they certainly found it very dull.

In

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the television era races racing needs monumental collapses, spectacular
falls, come-backs after being shot or having suffered from cancer to get
some of the same dramatic force which came almost natural in the area of
Coppi and Bartali.

Benjo Maso

Hall of Fame post
Bill C

What counts is that he balanced it with his own opinion. That's the best
I've seen.

benjo maso said:

Or rather, in the 1940's and 1950's and before when legends and
myth were much stronger than reality. The main reason was of course that
before the introduction of television the public could see two seconds at
most and the journalists who followed the race only some fragments. Because
of that, a report of a race was almost literature: half fact, half fiction.
And of course much more sensational, stirring, moving, touching, dramatic,
etc. than prosaic reality. For instance, when Coppi made a breakaway of 100
km or more - as in the Giro of 1949 - a writer as Dino Buzzatti could give
it epic, homeric proportions. But that's impossible when everybody has seen
the race on television.

for those who haven't seen the kind of stuff benjo is mentioning, i'll
paste a snip (thanks to bob schwartz for making me aware of it in the
first place)-

"A feeling hard to describe, a kind of spiritual tension,
pity, astonishment in the presence of this desperate duel,
swept over the valleys. Would the old champion manage to
save himself? Or was this the moment of destiny knocking?
The blast of a horn reverberated, echoing from the peaks.
It was the horn of a motorcycle messenger, yet it seemed
to come from some solitary mountain god giving the signal.
Then Coppi stopped swaying above the saddle: he had found
a second wind, coming from some unknown source, the
invisible hand of victory pulled him from place to place,
and pushed him down the Val Gardena. He was flying now,
terribly happy, although his face spoke only of pain."

At the finish in Bolzano he was 7 minutes up on Bartali.
With bonuses he had closed all but 28 seconds of the gap
to Leoni.

"And then, separated by long intervals, the others arrive.
They all look crucified."
http://www.google.com/groups?&selm=3af2daa1%240%2414444%24272ea4a1%40news.execpc.com

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

(snip)

Quoted message said:

I have heard three are two different reasons why Coppi was greater (I don't
think many people think that Bartali is surpassing Merckx):

1) According to Geminiani Coppi was the greatest, because he had to compete
with greater riders than Merckx: Poulidor, Zoetemelk and even Gimondi coudnt
compare to Bartali, Koblet, Bobet, Kübler and Magni. True, but not very
convincing. One could also argue that Merckx was so strong that he dwarfed
his rivals.

2) Jacques Goddet said once: Merckx is the best rider ever, but Coppi was
better. According to him Coppi was the greatest talent ever and only athlete
he had ever known who seemed to be made for the bicycle. Although Merckx won
twice as much as Coppi, Coppi's victories were - again according to Goddet -
pure works of art, never equalled, not even by Merckx.

3) The italian sport historian Gian Paolo Ormezzano wrote: Merckx was the
strongest, but Coppi the greatest. The opinions of Ormezzano and Goddet are
IMO only comprehensible if we accept that sport can be much more than just
being the fastest or the strongest and is also an important cultural
phenomenon. It can go for any sport of course, but never more than for
bicycle racing on the road in general and the Tour of the Giro in
particular. Or rather, in the 1940's and 1950's and before when legends and
myth were much stronger than reality. The main reason was of course that
before the introduction of television the public could see two seconds at
most and the journalists who followed the race only some fragments. Because
of that, a report of a race was almost literature: half fact, half fiction.
And of course much more sensational, stirring, moving, touching, dramatic,
etc. than prosaic reality. For instance, when Coppi made a breakaway of 100
km or more - as in the Giro of 1949 - a writer as Dino Buzzatti could give
it epic, homeric proportions. But that's impossible when everybody has seen
the race on television. When Merckx rode two hours alone in front, perhaps
viewers thought it was admirable, but they certainly found it very dull. In
the television era races racing needs monumental collapses, spectacular
falls, come-backs after being shot or having suffered from cancer to get
some of the same dramatic force which came almost natural in the area of
Coppi and Bartali.

Benjo Maso

Brilliant post, Benjo. Thank you so much!

benjo maso said:

3) The italian sport historian Gian Paolo Ormezzano wrote: Merckx was the
strongest, but Coppi the greatest.

To add to the legend, the political climate surrounding Coppi's win in
1949 was a bit more serious than what you've seen lately. Winning
cancer is quite an achievement, to prevent a civil war is another.

Quoted message said:

Benjo Maso

MJ;

--
..signature necesse est

h squared said:

benjo maso wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Or rather, in the 1940's and 1950's and before when legends and
myth were much stronger than reality. The main reason was of course that
before the introduction of television the public could see two seconds at
most and the journalists who followed the race only some fragments. Because
of that, a report of a race was almost literature: half fact, half fiction.
And of course much more sensational, stirring, moving, touching, dramatic,
etc. than prosaic reality. For instance, when Coppi made a breakaway of 100
km or more - as in the Giro of 1949 - a writer as Dino Buzzatti could give
it epic, homeric proportions. But that's impossible when everybody has seen
the race on television.

Quoted message said:

for those who haven't seen the kind of stuff benjo is mentioning, i'll
paste a snip (thanks to bob schwartz for making me aware of it in the
first place)-

Quoted message said:

"A feeling hard to describe, a kind of spiritual tension,
pity, astonishment in the presence of this desperate duel,
swept over the valleys. Would the old champion manage to
save himself? Or was this the moment of destiny knocking?
The blast of a horn reverberated, echoing from the peaks.
It was the horn of a motorcycle messenger, yet it seemed
to come from some solitary mountain god giving the signal.
Then Coppi stopped swaying above the saddle: he had found
a second wind, coming from some unknown source, the
invisible hand of victory pulled him from place to place,
and pushed him down the Val Gardena. He was flying now,
terribly happy, although his face spoke only of pain."

Quoted message said:

At the finish in Bolzano he was 7 minutes up on Bartali.
With bonuses he had closed all but 28 seconds of the gap
to Leoni.

Quoted message said:

"And then, separated by long intervals, the others arrive.
They all look crucified."
http://www.google.com/groups?&selm=3af2daa1%240%2414444%24272ea4a1%40news.execpc.com

It's wonderful to see that the romance of sport one finds in the writings
of Rebuffat was equalled by others of the same epoch! How small and
mundane our world seems at times...

Quoted message said:

From: Clovis Lark [email hidden]
Date: 7/22/2004 11:32 AM Eastern

Quoted message said:

It's wonderful to see that the romance of sport one finds in the writings
of Rebuffat was equalled by others of the same epoch! How small and
mundane our world seems at times...

It's all [censored]. Nothing matters but the times and placings. This IS a business
damnit.
So we've all been told by several regulars here over and over.
Bill C

"Benjamin Weiner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:40ff15c5$1@darkstar...

(snip)

Quoted message said:

I also wonder if the context of the racing of the time - bad roads,
and hard conditions, slow emergence in the postwar era from the
poverty and destruction of the war - lent a heroic aura to the races
which in a more prosperous time become, as television, another mass
entertainment. Not that there's anything wrong with entertainment,
but it isn't usually epic.

You're absolutely right, Bad roads, hard conditions, etc. were always a
great inspiration for journalists. That was the reason why Desgrange refused
to shorten the stages, punished the riders when they rode too slowly, looked
for the hard climbs on bad roads in the mountains, etc. He thought riders
had to suffer to make a credible description of their sufferings. It was
only in the 1930's that Jacques Goddet, his new second of command, made him
understand that the readers of L'Auto were not impressed by the hardships of
the Tour it itselves, but by the way it was described. But of course, all
changed in the television era. Now the organizers need visible bad roads,
etc. to lent a heroic aura to the race. The best example is of course
Paris-Roubaix. It's quite ironic that the present day organizers are looking
for the worst roads in the region with the same zeal as the creators hundred
years ago were looking to the best roads.

Benjo Maso

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

Quoted message said:

benjo maso said:

Or rather, in the 1940's and 1950's and before when legends and
myth were much stronger than reality. The main reason was of course that
before the introduction of television the public could see two seconds

at

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

most and the journalists who followed the race only some fragments.

Because

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

of that, a report of a race was almost literature: half fact, half

fiction.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And of course much more sensational, stirring, moving, touching,

dramatic,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

etc. than prosaic reality. For instance, when Coppi made a breakaway of

100

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

km or more - as in the Giro of 1949 - a writer as Dino Buzzatti could

give

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it epic, homeric proportions. But that's impossible when everybody has

seen

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the race on television.

for those who haven't seen the kind of stuff benjo is mentioning, i'll
paste a snip (thanks to bob schwartz for making me aware of it in the
first place)-

"A feeling hard to describe, a kind of spiritual tension,
pity, astonishment in the presence of this desperate duel,
swept over the valleys. Would the old champion manage to
save himself? Or was this the moment of destiny knocking?
The blast of a horn reverberated, echoing from the peaks.
It was the horn of a motorcycle messenger, yet it seemed
to come from some solitary mountain god giving the signal.
Then Coppi stopped swaying above the saddle: he had found
a second wind, coming from some unknown source, the
invisible hand of victory pulled him from place to place,
and pushed him down the Val Gardena. He was flying now,
terribly happy, although his face spoke only of pain."

At the finish in Bolzano he was 7 minutes up on Bartali.
With bonuses he had closed all but 28 seconds of the gap
to Leoni.

"And then, separated by long intervals, the others arrive.
They all look crucified."

http://www.google.com/groups?&selm=3af2daa1%240%2414444%24272ea4a1%40news.execpc.com

It;s great, but pretty moderate compared to the throbbing metaphores of
Desgranges, which in the 1940's and 1950's seemed no longer appropriate in
the light of the horrors of the Second World War and had yielded to more
businesslike commentary. See for instance Desgrange in1930: "Where art thou,
Pindare, to sing the praises of our Charles [Pélissier] in thy Epinicia? Why
wereth thou not with us, Corneille, prince of the tragedy? Thou should have
discovered new emotions in the human soul. Because it was all there: poetry,
majesty, sorrow and also sport".

Benjo Maso

"Roland2k" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"benjo maso" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

(snip)

Quoted message said:

I have heard three are two different reasons why Coppi was greater (I

don't

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

think many people think that Bartali is surpassing Merckx):

1) According to Geminiani Coppi was the greatest, because he had to

compete

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

with greater riders than Merckx: Poulidor, Zoetemelk and even Gimondi

coudnt

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

compare to Bartali, Koblet, Bobet, Kübler and Magni. True, but not very
convincing. One could also argue that Merckx was so strong that he

dwarfed

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

his rivals.

2) Jacques Goddet said once: Merckx is the best rider ever, but Coppi

was

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

better. According to him Coppi was the greatest talent ever and only

athlete

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

he had ever known who seemed to be made for the bicycle. Although Merckx

won

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

twice as much as Coppi, Coppi's victories were - again according to

Goddet -

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

pure works of art, never equalled, not even by Merckx.

3) The italian sport historian Gian Paolo Ormezzano wrote: Merckx was

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

strongest, but Coppi the greatest. The opinions of Ormezzano and Goddet

are

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

IMO only comprehensible if we accept that sport can be much more than

just

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

being the fastest or the strongest and is also an important cultural
phenomenon. It can go for any sport of course, but never more than for
bicycle racing on the road in general and the Tour of the Giro in
particular. Or rather, in the 1940's and 1950's and before when legends

and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

myth were much stronger than reality. The main reason was of course that
before the introduction of television the public could see two seconds

at

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

most and the journalists who followed the race only some fragments.

Because

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

of that, a report of a race was almost literature: half fact, half

fiction.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And of course much more sensational, stirring, moving, touching,

dramatic,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

etc. than prosaic reality. For instance, when Coppi made a breakaway of

100

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

km or more - as in the Giro of 1949 - a writer as Dino Buzzatti could

give

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it epic, homeric proportions. But that's impossible when everybody has

seen

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the race on television. When Merckx rode two hours alone in front,

perhaps

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

viewers thought it was admirable, but they certainly found it very dull.

In

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the television era races racing needs monumental collapses, spectacular
falls, come-backs after being shot or having suffered from cancer to get
some of the same dramatic force which came almost natural in the area of
Coppi and Bartali.

Benjo Maso

Brilliant post, Benjo. Thank you so much!

Thank you, and all the others!

Benjo Maso