Lance: "Patrice Halgand = [censored]"

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

Quoted message said:

After yesterday's stage Lance wasn't too happy with the actions of Patrice Halgand. When
Dauphine-leader Lance fell in the descent Halgand attacked twice. Armstrong was pretty much [censored]
off by Halgand's acting and called him an [censored] after the race. Halgand tried to defend himself
by saying that he thought that Armstrong was behind because of a puncture...

And I doubt you read that too.Especially that last sentence. Quite some defense that would
be .......

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

After yesterday's stage Lance wasn't too happy with the actions of Patrice Halgand. When
Dauphine-leader Lance fell in the descent Halgand attacked twice. Armstrong was pretty much
[censored] by Halgand's acting and called him an [censored] after the race. Halgand tried to defend
himself by saying that he thought that Armstrong was behind because of a puncture...

And I doubt you read that too.Especially that last sentence. Quite some defense that would
be .......

From L'Equipe:

Le Texan est resté persuadé que le Français l'avait attaqué alors qu'il s'était «vautré» après un
vol plané à plus de 70 km/h dans la descente du col de Taninges. «Faux», a vainement rétorqué
Halgand, qui s'est fait renvoyer à ses chères études alors qu'il allait donner des explications à

une attitude d'amateur que d'attaquer un leader à terre», a claironné l'Américain après l'arrivée.
«Cela explique le bien fondé de l'interrogation des gens sur la présence de Jean Delatour au départ
du Tour de France».

Nice mouth. I wonder, if Armstrong had been lying in second place to Ulrich when Ulrich crashed,
would Armstrong have waited or attacked? Crashes happen. That's part of racing and no gifts are or
should be given. And please don't tell me about Armstong waiting for Ulrich. When his place was
threatened on the descent, he stopped waiting for Ulrich and did what he had to do for himself.

In article <[email hidden]>, "B. Lafferty"

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

After yesterday's stage Lance wasn't too happy with the actions of Patrice Halgand. When
Dauphine-leader Lance fell in the descent Halgand attacked twice. Armstrong was pretty much
[censored] by Halgand's acting and called him an [censored] after the race. Halgand tried to
defend himself by saying that he thought that Armstrong was behind because of a puncture...

Quoted message said:

From L'Equipe:

Le Texan est resté persuadé que le Français l'avait attaqué alors qu'il s'était «vautré» après un
vol plané à plus de 70 km/h dans la descente du col de Taninges. «Faux», a vainement rétorqué
Halgand, qui s'est fait renvoyer à ses chères études alors qu'il allait donner des explications à

Quoted message said:

une attitude d'amateur que d'attaquer un leader à terre», a claironné l'Américain après l'arrivée.
«Cela explique le bien fondé de l'interrogation des gens sur la présence de Jean Delatour au
départ du Tour de France».

Nice mouth. I wonder, if Armstrong had been lying in second place to Ulrich when Ulrich crashed,
would Armstrong have waited or attacked? Crashes happen. That's part of racing and no gifts are or
should be given. And please don't tell me about Armstong waiting for Ulrich. When his place was
threatened on the descent, he stopped waiting for Ulrich and did what he had to do for himself.

Traditionally, you don't attack for a break when the lead riders are feeding, during temporary
misfortunes (crashes, flats) of the rider you are attacking, or on the last day of the Tour before
you can see the Arc de Triomphe.

Cycling is a sport where you defy this complex etiquette at your peril, because so much success can
depend on ad hoc assistance in working a break or closing a gap, and because so much trust is
required to ride safely in a 200-man peloton. Learning this stuff is part of the very structured
tradition of working your way up as a domestique before you get to become a star rider.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email hidden] sfu.ca~rcousineOpen ↗ President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

So Merckx should have waited for Ocana? The peloton should have waited for buttercup Wim Van Est?
The leaders should have waited for Duclos at the exit of the Arenburg? Johan should have waited for
George to get out of the ditch? There are many more examples. This is racing. Some riders crash and
lose. Some crash and still go on to win. If you want to win you crash and chase back. It's all part
of racing and a bit different than attacking a feed zone (which is regualrly done) or attacking
during the call of nature or slipping into the lead break that you were't in before boing stopped at
the level crossing. I suspect that Mister Nice Personality may be in the process of getting some
payback this season.

BTW, I hear that NASCAR is considering a rule change to neutralize races in which the leader crashes
to give time to get in the replacement car..

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

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, "B. Lafferty"

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

"Kenny" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> After yesterday's stage Lance wasn't too happy with the actions of Patrice Halgand. When
> Dauphine-leader Lance fell in the descent Halgand attacked twice. Armstrong was pretty much
> [censored] by Halgand's acting and called him an [censored] after the race. Halgand tried to
> defend himself by saying that he thought that Armstrong was behind because of a puncture...

Quoted message said:

From L'Equipe:

Le Texan est resté persuadé que le Français l'avait attaqué alors qu'il s'était «vautré» après
un vol plané à plus de 70 km/h dans la descente

du

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

col de Taninges. «Faux», a vainement rétorqué Halgand, qui s'est fait renvoyer à ses chères
études alors qu'il allait donner des explications

à

C'est

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

une attitude d'amateur que d'attaquer un leader à terre», a claironné l'Américain après
l'arrivée. «Cela explique le bien fondé de

l'interrogation

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

des gens sur la présence de Jean Delatour au départ du Tour de France».

Nice mouth. I wonder, if Armstrong had been lying in second place to

Ulrich

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

when Ulrich crashed, would Armstrong have waited or attacked? Crashes happen. That's part of
racing and no gifts are or should be given. And please don't tell me about Armstong waiting for
Ulrich. When his place

was

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

threatened on the descent, he stopped waiting for Ulrich and did what he

had

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

to do for himself.

Traditionally, you don't attack for a break when the lead riders are feeding, during temporary
misfortunes (crashes, flats) of the rider you are attacking, or on the last day of the Tour before
you can see the Arc de Triomphe.

Cycling is a sport where you defy this complex etiquette at your peril, because so much success
can depend on ad hoc assistance in working a break or closing a gap, and because so much trust is
required to ride safely in a 200-man peloton. Learning this stuff is part of the very structured
tradition of working your way up as a domestique before you get to become a star rider.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email hidden] sfu.ca~rcousineOpen ↗ President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

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

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, "B. Lafferty"

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

"Kenny" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> After yesterday's stage Lance wasn't too happy with the actions of

Traditionally, you don't attack for a break when the lead riders are feeding, during temporary
misfortunes (crashes, flats) of the rider you are attacking,

That was the reason why Zülle, Boogerd, Gotti, etc. were so angry after the massive crash at the
Passage du Gois in 1999 when they were attacked by the teams of Olano, Julich and ... Armstrong.

Benjo Maso

And it would have been a very different race considering Zulle's form. Lance might even be looking
for win four this year. But that's racing. Time for the Texan to grow up.

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, "B. Lafferty"

Quoted message said:

"Bart" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
>
> "Kenny" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> "]news:[email hidden]...
> > After yesterday's stage Lance wasn't too happy with the actions of

Traditionally, you don't attack for a break when the lead riders are feeding, during temporary
misfortunes (crashes, flats) of the rider you are attacking,

That was the reason why Zülle, Boogerd, Gotti, etc. were so angry after

the

Quoted message said:

massive crash at the Passage du Gois in 1999 when they were attacked by

the

Quoted message said:

teams of Olano, Julich and ... Armstrong.

Benjo Maso

B. Lafferty said:

And it would have been a very different race considering Zulle's form. Lance might even be looking
for win four this year. But that's racing. Time for the Texan to grow up.

Did Zulle express outrage or disappointment after that attack, and/or did the other "victims" of the
attacks mentioned in other posts object to them?

Perhaps attacking during a contender's misfortune is a part of bike racing, just like the
unfortunate contender getting [censored] about it is.

--
--
Lynn Wallace xmission.com~lawallOpen ↗ "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we
could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in
charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

In article said:

"Ryan Cousineau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Traditionally, you don't attack for a break when the lead riders are feeding, during temporary
misfortunes (crashes, flats) of the rider you are attacking,

That was the reason why Zülle, Boogerd, Gotti, etc. were so angry after the massive crash at the
Passage du Gois in 1999 when they were attacked by the teams of Olano, Julich and ... Armstrong.

That is a very different case. All the teams knew about the problem with the road ahead and some
teams worked very hard to be at the front before the dangerous section (to avoid crashes). It's the
same as working hard to be at the front before the Arenberg Forest or any of the narrow climbs in
the Dutch Classics. If you're unwilling to work hard to be in front you may have to suffer the
consequences.

-WG

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

Quoted message said:

Crashes happen. That's part of racing and no gifts are or should be given.

<snip>

from:

velonews.com4103.0.htmlOpen ↗

Halgand defended himself, telling AFP: "I thought Armstrong had had a puncture. I did not know he
had fallen. That's why I attacked, but then I was told to stop because Armstrong was on the ground.
I agree you should not attack in these circumstances."

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Crashes happen. That's part of racing and no gifts are or should be given.

<snip>

from:

velonews.com4103.0.htmlOpen ↗

Halgand defended himself, telling AFP: "I thought Armstrong had had a puncture. I did not know he
had fallen. That's why I attacked, but then I was told to stop because Armstrong was on the
ground. I agree you should

not

Quoted message said:

attack in these circumstances."

Do you actually believe he would admit that he decided to attack? If you think that, I have some
waterfront property that might interest you.

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

Quoted message said:

So Merckx should have waited for Ocana? The peloton should have waited for buttercup Wim Van Est?
The leaders should have waited for Duclos at the exit of the Arenburg? Johan should have waited
for George to get out of the ditch? There are many more examples.

Whatever douchebag, not waiting (all your examples) is not the same thing as attacking someone when
they go down.

-Amit

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

from:

velonews.com4103.0.htmlOpen ↗

Halgand defended himself, telling AFP: "I thought Armstrong had had a puncture. I did not know
he had fallen. That's why I attacked, but then

I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

was told to stop because Armstrong was on the ground. I agree you should

not

Quoted message said:

attack in these circumstances."

Do you actually believe he would admit that he decided to attack?

If that was accepted behavior in the peloton, yes.

Quoted message said:

If you think that, I have some waterfront property that might interest you.

Not attacking the GC leader who has crashed is one of the unwritten rules in the peloton. Sometimes
those rules get broken.

Other unwritten rules:

don't attack in the feed zone don't attack the GC leader if he flats don't take the wheel of a
sprinter who's getting lead out

etc.

Like any rule, these rules get broken, but most riders will follow the code of conduct since their
peers can make life miserable for them if they acquire a bad reputation.

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

Quoted message said:

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

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So Merckx should have waited for Ocana? The peloton should have waited

for

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

buttercup Wim Van Est? The leaders should have waited for Duclos at the exit of the Arenburg?
Johan should have waited for George to get out of

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

ditch? There are many more examples.

Whatever douchebag, not waiting (all your examples) is not the same thing as attacking someone
when they go down.

-Amit

Dear [censored], Please explain at what point and under what circumstances not waiting turns into an
attack. Did Armstaong and Ulrich not wait for Zulle or was that an attack?

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

from:

velonews.com4103.0.htmlOpen ↗

Halgand defended himself, telling AFP: "I thought Armstrong had had a puncture. I did not know
he had fallen. That's why I attacked, but

then

Quoted message said:

I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

was told to stop because Armstrong was on the ground. I agree you

should

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

not

Quoted message said:

attack in these circumstances."

Do you actually believe he would admit that he decided to attack?

If that was accepted behavior in the peloton, yes.

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

Quoted message said:

In article said:

"Ryan Cousineau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Traditionally, you don't attack for a break when the lead riders are feeding, during temporary
misfortunes (crashes, flats) of the rider

you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

are attacking,

That was the reason why Zülle, Boogerd, Gotti, etc. were so angry after

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

massive crash at the Passage du Gois in 1999 when they were attacked by

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

teams of Olano, Julich and ... Armstrong.

That is a very different case. All the teams knew about the problem with the road ahead and some
teams worked very hard to be at the front before the dangerous section (to avoid crashes). It's
the same as working hard to be at the front before the Arenberg Forest or any of the narrow climbs
in the Dutch Classics. If you're unwilling to work hard to be in front you may have to suffer the
consequences.

You mean it's OK to attack if a crash is a riders's own fault? But that's almost always the case:
lack of concentration, taking to many risks, not riding in front, misjudging a situation, etc., etc.
There are exceptions of course: a riders might be hit by a car or a motorcycle, like Poulidor in
1968 (by the way, his rivals attacked immediately). But who is to decide if it's justified or not?
For instance, in the stage to Saint-Nazaire, Michael Boogerd was all the time in front, but two
miles before the Passage du Gois he got a flat and couldn't be back in time. So was it right to
attack him, yes of no? The point is of course that riders are completely opportunistic. It doesn't
look good to attack when a rival has crashed or has a flat. But if they think they can get away with
it they do it all the time, as they did after the Passage du Gois. Armstrong's remarks on the Jean
Delatour team were completely uncalled for, but the message it's clear: a small team can't get away
with it and they will regret it. No surprising stage wins in the Tour for Jean Delatour...

Benjo Maso

The difference is what was reported. For some reason, just about everything Lance says makes it to
the web through some route. The more you win, the more they print. I have no doubt that Zulle was
cussing mad but I guess there were no reporters around that thought anyone would care.

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

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

And it would have been a very different race considering Zulle's form. Lance might even be
looking for win four this year. But that's racing. Time for the Texan to grow up.

Did Zulle express outrage or disappointment after that attack, and/or did the other "victims" of
the attacks mentioned in other posts object to them?

Perhaps attacking during a contender's misfortune is a part of bike racing, just like the
unfortunate contender getting [censored] about it is.

--
--
Lynn Wallace xmission.com~lawallOpen ↗ "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we
could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP
in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

>
> from:
>
> velonews.com4103.0.htmlOpen ↗
>
> Halgand defended himself, telling AFP: "I thought Armstrong had had

a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> puncture. I did not know he had fallen. That's why I attacked, but

then

Quoted message said:

I

Quoted message said:

> was told to stop because Armstrong was on the ground. I agree you

should

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

not
> attack in these circumstances."

Do you actually believe he would admit that he decided to attack?

If that was accepted behavior in the peloton, yes.

Face it, if it was accepted behavior, he would have defended his actions.

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

"B. Lafferty" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> >
> > from:
> >
> > velonews.com4103.0.htmlOpen ↗
> >
> > Halgand defended himself, telling AFP: "I thought Armstrong had

had

Quoted message said:

a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > puncture. I did not know he had fallen. That's why I attacked, but

then

Quoted message said:

I
> > was told to stop because Armstrong was on the ground. I agree you

should

Quoted message said:

> not
> > attack in these circumstances."
>
>
> Do you actually believe he would admit that he decided to attack?

If that was accepted behavior in the peloton, yes.

Quoted message said:

Face it, if it was accepted behavior, he would have defended his actions.

the truth because they raise their right hand and swear that they will. Read Benjo's second post on
this thread and see if you can't come up with at least one reason H. wouldn't admit to intentionally
attacking Armstrong if he had.

In article said:

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

Quoted message said:

In article said:

"Ryan Cousineau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

> Traditionally, you don't attack for a break when the lead riders are feeding, during
> temporary misfortunes (crashes, flats) of the rider

you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> are attacking,

That was the reason why Zülle, Boogerd, Gotti, etc. were so angry after

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

massive crash at the Passage du Gois in 1999 when they were attacked by

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

teams of Olano, Julich and ... Armstrong.

That is a very different case. All the teams knew about the problem with the road ahead and some
teams worked very hard to be at the front before the dangerous section (to avoid crashes). It's
the same as working hard to be at the front before the Arenberg Forest or any of the narrow
climbs in the Dutch Classics. If you're unwilling to work hard to be in front you may have to
suffer the consequences.

You mean it's OK to attack if a crash is a riders's own fault? But that's almost always the
case: lack of concentration, taking to many risks, not riding in front, misjudging a situation,
etc., etc.

The examples I gave you were not about risk taking, lack of concentration, or misjudging a
situation. Everyone in the race knows they should be at the front at a given point to avoid the
expected crashes or the congestion behind them. (Why do you think the guys racing for the win are
always in the top 15 going into the forest?) That is not the same as one guy crashing on a descent.

-WG