Pantani

"Jim Flom" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:qlxIf.282$Nr5.270
@clgrps13:

Quoted message said:

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote ...

Quoted message said:

I don't worship him. It's a thing called empathy and understanding.
Must be a real [censored] up on that pedestal.

But the air is clean and the view splendid.

On most days, you can see all the way to the neighbors' faults.

--
Bill Asher

Gift? Perhaps you really ought to look at the DVD coverage. Over the
final five kilometers Armstrong was on his very limit as was Pantani.
It wasn't important for Armstrong to WIN that stage and Pantani's work
had given Armstrong additional time. On that last kickup Lance simply
gave up. What makes you believe that he should have sprinted when he
was already all in?

Obviously you don't understand stage racing.

It was a gift only in that it would have been stupid to try to sprint
with Marco.

Henry the [censored] wrote: "He was physically small, but he was also a
moral midget. He blamed everyone else for his problems. Everyone but
the person who caused them: himself."

This means exactly what? That Pantani wasn't a great racer? That he
didn't fight back from a serious leg injury caused by some moronic
driver driving out onto a race course? That he didn't attack over and
over and over?

It is informative to see what people consider important.

" I don't worship him. It's a thing called empathy and understanding.
Must be a real [censored] up on that pedestal."

Err, rember this is Henry you're talking to. He isn't on a pedestal -
he's in the barrel.

Tom Kunich said:

I just watched the WCV versions of the 1998 Giro and Tour. I've got to
tell you, dope or no dope that guy was something special. He attacked
before, during and after. He was great everywhere. Anyone that
remembers that time can tell you that almost everyone was using EPO but
Pantani was beyond drugs.

Yeah, I remember thinking that after Ullrich took the yellow jersey
following the stage 7 time trial that the GC competiton was pretty much
over. What Pantani did on stage 15, leaving Ullrich a rain-soaked,
grovelling heap on the Galibier was truly epic. That was a fabulous
stage, as was the following day up the Madeleine when Ullrich attacked.
In retrospect maybe the whole peleton was drugged to the gills at the
time (or not) but, in the moment, it was exciting to watch. As for the
"morality" of Pantani-- or any other human being for that matter: That
ain't up to me to judge (thank goodness).

I sometimes wonder how different Ullrich's career/life would have been
had he not cracked in '98 and gone on to win. I, for one, will be
rooting for him this year. (Yes, probably in vain but rooting
nonetheless).

Tom Kunich said:

Henry the [censored] wrote: "He was physically small, but he was also a
moral midget. He blamed everyone else for his problems. Everyone but
the person who caused them: himself."

This means exactly what? That Pantani wasn't a great racer? That he
didn't fight back from a serious leg injury caused by some moronic
driver driving out onto a race course? That he didn't attack over and
over and over?

Dumbass -

He was a great racer and a lame person.

Quoted message said:

It is informative to see what people consider important.

Indeed.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

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

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich said:

Henry the [censored] wrote: "He was physically small, but he was also a
moral midget. He blamed everyone else for his problems. Everyone but
the person who caused them: himself."

This means exactly what? That Pantani wasn't a great racer? That he
didn't fight back from a serious leg injury caused by some moronic
driver driving out onto a race course? That he didn't attack over and
over and over?

Dumbass -

He was a great racer and a lame person.

If I remember correctly that's what was said about you.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich said:

I just watched the WCV versions of the 1998 Giro and Tour. I've got to
tell you, dope or no dope that guy was something special. He attacked
before, during and after. He was great everywhere. Anyone that
remembers that time can tell you that almost everyone was using EPO but
Pantani was beyond drugs.

Yeah, I remember thinking that after Ullrich took the yellow jersey
following the stage 7 time trial that the GC competiton was pretty much
over. What Pantani did on stage 15, leaving Ullrich a rain-soaked,
grovelling heap on the Galibier was truly epic. That was a fabulous
stage, as was the following day up the Madeleine when Ullrich attacked.
In retrospect maybe the whole peleton was drugged to the gills at the
time (or not) but, in the moment, it was exciting to watch. As for the
"morality" of Pantani-- or any other human being for that matter: That
ain't up to me to judge (thank goodness).

I sometimes wonder how different Ullrich's career/life would have been
had he not cracked in '98 and gone on to win. I, for one, will be
rooting for him this year. (Yes, probably in vain but rooting
nonetheless).

Stage 15 is great drama! Pantani's climb up the slopes of Les Deux
Alpes was as captivating as Ullrich's collapse.

I agree with your suspicion that Ullrich will disappoint yet again. Jan
crumbling smacks of one, apart from having a bad day, revealing a
spirit lacking in that extra measure of tenacity and competitiveness
that would otherwise be galvanized by adversity (puncture, weather) and
forging on with greater intensity. Contrast Stage 15 in '98 where Riis
drops back to bolster the Yellow Jersey's morale with Stage 15 of
2003's TDF, in which LA clips a spectator's bag, goes down, then by a
superhuman feat, redoubles his efforts and even if it should kill him -
and by the pain etched on his face it looked to! - triumphs.

That on the day following of his collapse, Jan, with minimal team help,
and Pantani on his wheel, captured Stage 16 underscores that his
shortcomings aren't physical.

I remember a velonews.com interview with LA that was revealing. Lance
reflected that he was utterly confounded by Jan's complacency with his
numerous second place finishes. That was an attitude that LA could not
comprehend; it was unacceptable. Jan's always had the wheels; he needs
the will. Old news as it is, one does well to keep it in mind after
digesting the annual pre-season press releases attesting to his
exceptional fitness level and renewed drive.

Regardless, I find Jan's affability and foibles are endearing
qualities. I like the guy. It's a safe bet that he'd make good company
over a few wobbly pops. Too bad I can't say the same for his winning
the TDF again.

Luke

In article <[email hidden]>, William Asher

Quoted message said:

"Jim Flom" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:qlxIf.282$Nr5.270
@clgrps13:

Quoted message said:

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote ...

Quoted message said:

I don't worship him. It's a thing called empathy and understanding.
Must be a real [censored] up on that pedestal.

But the air is clean and the view splendid.

On most days, you can see all the way to the neighbors' faults.

Best considered from within glass abodes.

Luke

Bill C said:

Somewhere in there I realised what a [censored] I was and that being
human was more than brain power. I'm a bad example because I've spent
25 years trying to kill brain cells and become "normal". I still
haven't gotten the scores below 135 despite massive amounts of alcohol
and paint fumes from painting without a respirator while drinking.
I've gotten to the point where I don't hate everyone, and understand
their problems, because I have them too, just different ones.

<snip>

Dumbass -

You're memorializing Pantani.

Just because I tell the truth about him makes me a "[censored]"? Perhaps
I am that, but not because I tell the truth about Pantani. He's dead as
a doornail. Nothing you or I say will hurt his feelings.

The people who will need to adopt the attitude that you do are his
friends and family. People do that to assuage their grief. For the rest
of us, Pantani serves best as an object lesson.

Dude was a loser. As a person, no one should try to be like him.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Luke said:

Quoted message said:

I agree with your suspicion that Ullrich will disappoint yet again.

I wonder, if he doesn't win the thing this year will it really be
considered a a "disappointment"? Or if he does win will it be an
"upset"?

Seems like Basso and maybe a couple others are being touted as the
faves with Ullrich getting a sort of dark-horse status. Of course,
without LA the entire chemistry of the race changes and so it does not
necessarily follow that Basso will rip anyone's legs off in the
mountains. Anyway, I looking forward to seeing it all play out.
Here's hoping that all of the big guns make it to July healthy,
in-form, and hungry for a win.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Luke said:

Quoted message said:

I agree with your suspicion that Ullrich will disappoint yet again.

I wonder, if he doesn't win the thing this year will it really be
considered a a "disappointment"? Or if he does win will it be an
"upset"?

Seems like Basso and maybe a couple others are being touted as the
faves with Ullrich getting a sort of dark-horse status. Of course,
without LA the entire chemistry of the race changes and so it does not
necessarily follow that Basso will rip anyone's legs off in the
mountains. Anyway, I looking forward to seeing it all play out.
Here's hoping that all of the big guns make it to July healthy,
in-form, and hungry for a win.

Bring it on! Apres LA the TDF is no longer a competition for 2nd place.
Incidentally, now that the uniballer is no longer riding Sheryl,
perhaps he'll mount the Trek and entertain a comeback.

Luke

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich said:

I just watched the WCV versions of the 1998 Giro and Tour. I've got to
tell you, dope or no dope that guy was something special. He attacked
before, during and after. He was great everywhere. Anyone that
remembers that time can tell you that almost everyone was using EPO but
Pantani was beyond drugs.

riggodeezil said:

Yeah, I remember thinking that after Ullrich took the yellow jersey
following the stage 7 time trial that the GC competiton was pretty much
over. What Pantani did on stage 15, leaving Ullrich a rain-soaked,
grovelling heap on the Galibier was truly epic.

I seem to recall Ullrich had a puncture at the worst possible time just
before the start of the climb.

Having said that one enduring memory I have of Pantani when his chain
broke at the bottom of a final climb and he ended up
catching everybody. I think it was a stage in the giro it might even have
been the one where he was expelled.

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Bill C said:

Somewhere in there I realised what a [censored] I was and that being
human was more than brain power. I'm a bad example because I've spent
25 years trying to kill brain cells and become "normal". I still
haven't gotten the scores below 135 despite massive amounts of alcohol
and paint fumes from painting without a respirator while drinking.
I've gotten to the point where I don't hate everyone, and understand
their problems, because I have them too, just different ones.

<snip>

Dumbass -

You're memorializing Pantani.

Just because I tell the truth about him makes me a "[censored]"? Perhaps
I am that, but not because I tell the truth about Pantani. He's dead as
a doornail. Nothing you or I say will hurt his feelings.

The people who will need to adopt the attitude that you do are his
friends and family. People do that to assuage their grief. For the rest
of us, Pantani serves best as an object lesson.

Dude was a loser. As a person, no one should try to be like him.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Being flawed doesn't make you a loser, it makes you human. I agree
people shouldn't try to be like him, but if your genetics and nurture
make you a sensitive, emotional person, who needs a lot of support you
can try to deal with it, but it's not something that's easily changed.
Especially when you've never had to try, until the catastrophe hits.
I'm not defending his doping. What I'm saying, and have been, is that
it's tragic that he, unlike others who've been busted, was totally
unable to deal with the fallout from it. The penalty for doping
shouldn't be death, but in this case, with Pantani's emotional make-up
it was, and that's tragic.
If you see it all as "he did it to himself" that's fine. I used to
think the same way, and still do about a lot of things, but he clearly
had emotional/mental issues that it's too bad he couldn't/didn't get
help for.
He basically killed himself because he couldn't deal with a situation
he created. I think the penalty, in the end, was too high. I've never
said that he was a good example, or a role model, but I do think the
whole case can be a good example of unintended/unanticipated
consequences for dopers to think about. There's more to the "penalty"
than just the suspension and that could be a lot harder to handle.
Bill C

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

Quoted message said:

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Bill C said:

Somewhere in there I realised what a [censored] I was and that being
human was more than brain power. I'm a bad example because I've spent
25 years trying to kill brain cells and become "normal". I still
haven't gotten the scores below 135 despite massive amounts of alcohol
and paint fumes from painting without a respirator while drinking.
I've gotten to the point where I don't hate everyone, and understand
their problems, because I have them too, just different ones.

<snip>

Dumbass -

You're memorializing Pantani.

Just because I tell the truth about him makes me a "[censored]"? Perhaps
I am that, but not because I tell the truth about Pantani. He's dead as
a doornail. Nothing you or I say will hurt his feelings.

The people who will need to adopt the attitude that you do are his
friends and family. People do that to assuage their grief. For the rest
of us, Pantani serves best as an object lesson.

Dude was a loser. As a person, no one should try to be like him.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Being flawed doesn't make you a loser, it makes you human. I agree
people shouldn't try to be like him, but if your genetics and nurture
make you a sensitive, emotional person, who needs a lot of support you
can try to deal with it, but it's not something that's easily changed.
Especially when you've never had to try, until the catastrophe hits.
I'm not defending his doping. What I'm saying, and have been, is that
it's tragic that he, unlike others who've been busted, was totally
unable to deal with the fallout from it. The penalty for doping
shouldn't be death, but in this case, with Pantani's emotional make-up
it was, and that's tragic.
If you see it all as "he did it to himself" that's fine. I used to
think the same way, and still do about a lot of things, but he clearly
had emotional/mental issues that it's too bad he couldn't/didn't get
help for.
He basically killed himself because he couldn't deal with a situation
he created. I think the penalty, in the end, was too high. I've never
said that he was a good example, or a role model, but I do think the
whole case can be a good example of unintended/unanticipated
consequences for dopers to think about. There's more to the "penalty"
than just the suspension and that could be a lot harder to handle.

I agree with you, just one observation.You say that it's "tragic that he,
unlike others who've been busted, was totally unable to deal with the
fallout from it". The point is that no other rider has ever been harrassed
and hounded for four years by the Italian justice, the UCI, etc., than
Pantani. Every time he was acquitted by Italian justice, the UCI demanded to
reopen the case. Every time he announced a comeback, the Italian justice or
the UCI was ready to bring a new charge against him - sometimes within two
days. An example: when the Italian raided the Giro in 1991 they made a list
of 86 suspects. And who was the first to be interrogated? Of course,
Pantani - although his name wasn't even on the list (it was only added
later). It's true that at the end he couldn't endure it anymore, but whe
don't have any ideas how much other riders would have done better than he.
And "he did it to himself"? OK, he certainly took performance enhancing
products (although he never tested positive), but so did the overwhelming
majority of the peloton. If allthe other "culprits" would have treated the
way he was, sure, it should have been his entire responsability. But that's
not the case at all. Some of them were caught, suspended for a few month and
could make a comeback without any problem, even his fellow-countrymen, but
most of them were never caught and some of them even venerated in their own
country. No wonder that the question he repeated more than once in the notes
he left in the hotelroom where he died, was "why just me?". I don't know the
answer.

Benjo

benjo maso said:

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

Quoted message said:

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Bill C wrote:

> Somewhere in there I realised what a [censored] I was and that being
> human was more than brain power. I'm a bad example because I've spent
> 25 years trying to kill brain cells and become "normal". I still
> haven't gotten the scores below 135 despite massive amounts of alcohol
> and paint fumes from painting without a respirator while drinking.
> I've gotten to the point where I don't hate everyone, and understand
> their problems, because I have them too, just different ones.

<snip>

Dumbass -

You're memorializing Pantani.

Just because I tell the truth about him makes me a "[censored]"? Perhaps
I am that, but not because I tell the truth about Pantani. He's dead as
a doornail. Nothing you or I say will hurt his feelings.

The people who will need to adopt the attitude that you do are his
friends and family. People do that to assuage their grief. For the rest
of us, Pantani serves best as an object lesson.

Dude was a loser. As a person, no one should try to be like him.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Being flawed doesn't make you a loser, it makes you human. I agree
people shouldn't try to be like him, but if your genetics and nurture
make you a sensitive, emotional person, who needs a lot of support you
can try to deal with it, but it's not something that's easily changed.
Especially when you've never had to try, until the catastrophe hits.
I'm not defending his doping. What I'm saying, and have been, is that
it's tragic that he, unlike others who've been busted, was totally
unable to deal with the fallout from it. The penalty for doping
shouldn't be death, but in this case, with Pantani's emotional make-up
it was, and that's tragic.
If you see it all as "he did it to himself" that's fine. I used to
think the same way, and still do about a lot of things, but he clearly
had emotional/mental issues that it's too bad he couldn't/didn't get
help for.
He basically killed himself because he couldn't deal with a situation
he created. I think the penalty, in the end, was too high. I've never
said that he was a good example, or a role model, but I do think the
whole case can be a good example of unintended/unanticipated
consequences for dopers to think about. There's more to the "penalty"
than just the suspension and that could be a lot harder to handle.

I agree with you, just one observation.You say that it's "tragic that he,
unlike others who've been busted, was totally unable to deal with the
fallout from it". The point is that no other rider has ever been harrassed
and hounded for four years by the Italian justice, the UCI, etc., than
Pantani. Every time he was acquitted by Italian justice, the UCI demanded to
reopen the case. Every time he announced a comeback, the Italian justice or
the UCI was ready to bring a new charge against him - sometimes within two
days. An example: when the Italian raided the Giro in 1991 they made a list
of 86 suspects. And who was the first to be interrogated? Of course,
Pantani - although his name wasn't even on the list (it was only added
later). It's true that at the end he couldn't endure it anymore, but whe
don't have any ideas how much other riders would have done better than he.
And "he did it to himself"? OK, he certainly took performance enhancing
products (although he never tested positive), but so did the overwhelming
majority of the peloton. If allthe other "culprits" would have treated the
way he was, sure, it should have been his entire responsability. But that's
not the case at all. Some of them were caught, suspended for a few month and
could make a comeback without any problem, even his fellow-countrymen, but
most of them were never caught and some of them even venerated in their own
country. No wonder that the question he repeated more than once in the notes
he left in the hotelroom where he died, was "why just me?". I don't know the
answer.

Benjo

Thanks for that Benjo.
I had thought about the witch hunt surrounding him and how they
hounded him in particular. I also don't know why, the only other person
that they've even come close to pushing that hard is Lance, and they
haven't yet because they weren't able to pin him down for anything in
particular. If they had, he'd be treated the same way.
It really is sad all around.
Bill C

Bill C said:

I also don't know why, the only other person
that they've even come close to pushing that hard is Lance, and they
haven't yet because they weren't able to pin him down for anything in
particular. If they had, he'd be treated the same way.
It really is sad all around.

dumbass,

there is a difference between armstrong and a lot of other riders who
seem have the mental toughness of a figure skater. armstrong's always
level headed and manages to do "the right thing" when things are going
wrong. he never shows any outward sign of panic and he's never had a
meltdown.

when delgado was late for the tour prologue, he cracked mentally and
lost 10 minutes and even got dropped in the TTT before getting his head
straight. that would not have happened to armstrong.

pantani never tested positive, he was only given a 2 wk rest, if that
happened to armstrong he would've taken the rest and been back to
racing as soon as possible. if they had found an empty EPO vial on him
like they did with millar he would not have cracked and spilled his
guts, he would've said that's not hard evidence of any drug use, and a
lot of people would see it that way.

amit said:

Bill C said:

I also don't know why, the only other person
that they've even come close to pushing that hard is Lance, and they
haven't yet because they weren't able to pin him down for anything in
particular. If they had, he'd be treated the same way.
It really is sad all around.

dumbass,

there is a difference between armstrong and a lot of other riders who
seem have the mental toughness of a figure skater. armstrong's always
level headed and manages to do "the right thing" when things are going
wrong. he never shows any outward sign of panic and he's never had a
meltdown.

when delgado was late for the tour prologue, he cracked mentally and
lost 10 minutes and even got dropped in the TTT before getting his head
straight. that would not have happened to armstrong.

pantani never tested positive, he was only given a 2 wk rest, if that
happened to armstrong he would've taken the rest and been back to
racing as soon as possible. if they had found an empty EPO vial on him
like they did with millar he would not have cracked and spilled his
guts, he would've said that's not hard evidence of any drug use, and a
lot of people would see it that way.

I agree completely. Armstrong is one tough SOB mentally, and his world
revolves around him and his ego wouldn't let this [censored] do anything but
[censored] him off. Can you see them pulling this kind of [censored] on Hinault and
what his reaction would have been? That would have been fun to watch.
Bill C

In article <[email hidden]>,

Bill C said:

Thanks for that Benjo.
I had thought about the witch hunt surrounding him and how they
hounded him in particular. I also don't know why, the only other person
that they've even come close to pushing that hard is Lance, and they
haven't yet because they weren't able to pin him down for anything in
particular. If they had, he'd be treated the same way.
It really is sad all around.
Bill C

C'mon Bill, you know the answer. Pulling one down from the heights is
much more entertaining than pushing one up; the fall is always more
fascinating. Yes, it is sad.

Luke

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I had thought about the witch hunt surrounding him and how they
hounded him in particular. I also don't know why, the only other person
that they've even come close to pushing that hard is Lance, and they
haven't yet because they weren't able to pin him down for anything in
particular. If they had, he'd be treated the same way.
It really is sad all around.

The way Armstrong was treated didn't even come close. The French justice
were softies compared to their Italian colleagues. No hidden videocamera's
is his hotelrooms, no house searches, preferably in the midst of the night,
even when only his family was there. No charges based on laws which weren't
even in vigor when the "crime" was supposed to have taken place. Besides,
Armstrong has always been supported by the UCI (for instance when he tested
positive after the prologue in the Tour of '99), Pantani never. On the
contrary. Of course, the policy of the UCI is to reduce the number of
cyclists to an absolute minimum. If they are testing riders in the morning,
they usually give them half an hour to prepare themselves and, as many of
them have observed, the hematocrite results were always two per cent less
then their own measurements. But with one single exception: Pantani in the
Giro of 1999. Pantani didn't even get the time to rise and the measurements
of the UCI were as accurate as possible (52 %). No wonder a lot of people
are convinced it had something to do with the millions of dollars the
gambling syndicates gained because of the unexpected loss of Pantani. I
don't know if it's true, but it's at least a logic explanation of the very
strange behaviour of the UCI.

Benjo