ullrich is not fat

chiefsupersizeme said:

What are you jerks talking about, saying Ullrich
is all fat? I have seen pictures and recent video
of him on OLN and he looks pretty lean to me.

I wouldn't say fat, but I would say thick, which is an affliction of
those who overindulge in the off-season as they age. Easy to lose fat,
harder to lose muscle and retain stamina.

Chiefhiawatha said:

What are you jerks talking about, saying Ullrich is all fat? I have seen
pictures and recent video of him on OLN and he looks pretty lean to me.

He may be he may not be, but people use the criticism because poor
eating habits and general weight problems have often hurt Jan. Jan has
looked pretty bad in the early season so people say he is fat. Truth be
told I don't think many people have actually seen him race. In Jan's
defense, he looked pretty terrible at the begining of last year, but he
rode into form by the time the latter stages of the tour hit. He did
have one bad day on early in the tour. No one talks about it because he
was not the main contender then, but condtioning was a problem that may
have cost him a victory.

--

lazysegall <[email hidden]> wrote in message
No one talks about it because he

Quoted message said:

was not the main contender then, but condtioning was a problem that may
have cost him a victory.

Hey,

When was the former winner, and multiple (4 at that point) second
place overall not a main contender for the Tour?
Also, wasn't conditioning also the problem for the other 190 losers
in the race?

Don't be lazy in your posts.

Thanks,
Ronde Champ

Yeah, knock it off, you'll bruise his sensitive ego. He's not fat,
he's just big-boned!

App, who's big-boned too.

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

Quoted message said:

lazysegall <[email hidden]> wrote in message
No one talks about it because he

Quoted message said:

was not the main contender then, but condtioning was a problem that may
have cost him a victory.

Hey,

When was the former winner, and multiple (4 at that point) second
place overall not a main contender for the Tour?
Also, wasn't conditioning also the problem for the other 190 losers
in the race?

Don't be lazy in your posts.

Thanks,
Ronde Champ

What you say is really true, but you also have to wonder how
much better Jan would be in the mountains if he were a few kilos
lighter.

Mike

Ronde Champ said:

lazysegall <[email hidden]> wrote in message No one
talks about it because he

Quoted message said:

was not the main contender then, but condtioning was a problem that
may have cost him a victory.

Hey,
When was the former winner, and multiple (4 at that point) second place
overall not a main contender for the Tour? Also, wasn't conditioning
also the problem for the other 190 losers in the race?
Don't be lazy in your posts.
Thanks, Ronde Champ

I mean that on the alpe d'huez stage beloki and not jan was considered
the main challenger. Jan lost time that day and no one seems to remember
it. Also, condtioning wasn't the problem for the other 190 people.
Regardless of how hard a lot of them train they will never win the tour.
I just don't see petacchi winning the TDF no matter how hard he trains.
How many people iin last years race do you actually think could have won
gc if they had better condtioning?

--

lazysegall <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

He may be he may not be, but people use the criticism because poor
eating habits and general weight problems have often hurt Jan. Jan has
looked pretty bad in the early season so people say he is fat. Truth be
told I don't think many people have actually seen him race. In Jan's
defense, he looked pretty terrible at the begining of last year, but he
rode into form by the time the latter stages of the tour hit.

Yeah, every year he is slow to get to form, but this is the first year
he's been getting humiliated on climbs and dropping out of all these
races. And in other years he's been worse off in other senses, like
with Coast, and the years with knee trouble. He has a formula for
getting second and it works very well. All he needs is for Armstrong
to falter...again.

I can't understand why he doesn't go back to what "worked" in 96 and
97.

Quoted message said:

I can't understand why he doesn't go back to what "worked" in 96 and
97.

Um, he didn't look too shabby in 2003. He is not in that form this year
however.... yet. To me, he looks a bit over weight and he is not in good
shape for someone of his potential. On the other hand, some people may be
saying he is fat and out of shape to get him motivated to challenge Lance
like last year. It surely was a fine race.

Curt

I think the Tour Weight is, for most riders, an unhealthy weight.
Lance looks older than 32 ( of course he had a terrible disease also).

When it comes to losing weight your body really, really wants to keep
to maintain the highest resistance to disease etc, you have to be
pretty obsessive. You have to have an unusual cognitive setup to be
able to tolerate feeling like [censored].

Curt said:

Quoted message said:

I can't understand why he doesn't go back to what "worked" in 96 and
97.

Um, he didn't look too shabby in 2003. He is not in that form this year
however.... yet. To me, he looks a bit over weight and he is not in good
shape for someone of his potential. On the other hand, some people may
be saying he is fat and out of shape to get him motivated to challenge
Lance like last year. It surely was a fine race.
Curt

In the tour he looked great, yes, but he still couldn't get it done.
Before the tour, he looked ok, probably better performances than any
other spring since '97. In '96 and '97 he was much stronger than any of
the following years on the leadup to the tour. But still he follows the
same program that has netted him second every year he competes since.

--

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

Quoted message said:

Yeah, knock it off, you'll bruise his sensitive ego. He's not fat,
he's just big-boned!

App, who's big-boned too.

I got your big-boned jersey, right here:

http://store.velogear.com/newfatguyjer.html

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

Quoted message said:

Curt said:

Quoted message said:

I can't understand why he doesn't go back to what "worked" in 96 and
97.

Um, he didn't look too shabby in 2003. He is not in that form this

year

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

however.... yet. To me, he looks a bit over weight and he is not in

good

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

shape for someone of his potential. On the other hand, some people may
be saying he is fat and out of shape to get him motivated to challenge
Lance like last year. It surely was a fine race.
Curt

In the tour he looked great, yes, but he still couldn't get it done.
Before the tour, he looked ok, probably better performances than any
other spring since '97. In '96 and '97 he was much stronger than any of
the following years on the leadup to the tour. But still he follows the
same program that has netted him second every year he competes since.

It is possible that he is going up against a person that is just better than
he is. I know people don't like to admit such things, but Lance may just be
a better rider and have a stronger team. If Lance wasn't racing, we may be
talking about Jan all the time.

I am hoping for another close race this year, but right now Lance looks very
strong to say the least. I still think Jan will look great in the TdF
though. He is tough and there is time.

Curt

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

Quoted message said:

lazysegall <[email hidden]> wrote in message
No one talks about it because he

Quoted message said:

was not the main contender then, but condtioning was a problem that may
have cost him a victory.

Hey,

When was the former winner, and multiple (4 at that point) second
place overall not a main contender for the Tour?

Ever since he celebrated his first win, he has come up short as far as the
fans are concerned.

Quoted message said:

Also, wasn't conditioning also the problem for the other 190 losers
in the race?

I guess there is only ever one guy per year in decent shape (except when
Lemond places second).

Quoted message said:

Don't be lazy in your posts.

Yeah, right.

Quoted message said:

Thanks,
Ronde Champ

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

lazysegall <[email hidden]> wrote in message
No one talks about it because he

Quoted message said:

was not the main contender then, but condtioning was a problem that may
have cost him a victory.

Hey,

When was the former winner, and multiple (4 at that point) second
place overall not a main contender for the Tour?
Also, wasn't conditioning also the problem for the other 190 losers
in the race?

Don't be lazy in your posts.

Thanks,
Ronde Champ

What you say is really true, but you also have to wonder how
much better Jan would be in the mountains if he were a few kilos
lighter.

Surely you are familiar with the American term "if it ain't broke,
don't fix it." What he really needs to work on is his descending and
bike-handling abilities...

-Sonarrat.

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

Quoted message said:

"Michael" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

lazysegall <[email hidden]> wrote in message
No one talks about it because he
> was not the main contender then, but condtioning was a problem that may
> have cost him a victory.

Hey,

When was the former winner, and multiple (4 at that point) second
place overall not a main contender for the Tour?
Also, wasn't conditioning also the problem for the other 190 losers
in the race?

Don't be lazy in your posts.

Thanks,
Ronde Champ

What you say is really true, but you also have to wonder how
much better Jan would be in the mountains if he were a few kilos
lighter.

Surely you are familiar with the American term "if it ain't broke,
don't fix it." What he really needs to work on is his descending and
bike-handling abilities...

That is also true, but as Liggett and Sherwin point out, a heavier
rider has a more difficult time keeping his center of gravity over
the bike on turns. I honestly don't know if that's true, but it may
be.

Mike

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

Quoted message said:

Ronde Champ said:

lazysegall <[email hidden]> wrote in message No one
talks about it because he

Quoted message said:

was not the main contender then, but condtioning was a problem that
may have cost him a victory.

Hey,
When was the former winner, and multiple (4 at that point) second

place

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

overall not a main contender for the Tour? Also, wasn't conditioning
also the problem for the other 190 losers in the race?
Don't be lazy in your posts.
Thanks, Ronde Champ

I mean that on the alpe d'huez stage beloki and not jan was considered
the main challenger.

By whom? Are you talking about the talking heads on TV or the newsgroups?

Quoted message said:

Jan lost time that day and no one seems to remember
it.

Says who? I sure remember and I assume everyone else does too that Jan was
puking etc. and then struck back during the next ITT that he won while
taking back over a minute or so. I never expected Beloki to beat Armstrong
or Ullrich. He never has before.

Also, condtioning wasn't the problem for the other 190 people.

Quoted message said:

Regardless of how hard a lot of them train they will never win the tour.

No matter how hard? I dunno about that. There are at least a half dozen guys
that could have taken Armstrong last year if they had known how weak he
would be and then trained to place the Tour at the same priority that
Armstrong did. Lance's victory last year was truly based on intertia and
having expectations that worked in his favor. He was not strong enough to
win his first Tour last year but he did not have to. Sometimes being the
defending champ works against you and sometimes it works for you but often
there are factors that work each way. IMO, 2003 was one year where nobody
else trained with the expectation of being able to win. Heck, the biggest
mouth of all of the competitors was on Simoni and that was after he planned
his year around the Giro. If Armstrong was not the defending champ last
year, Ullrich would have won. Simoni may have had a shot if he actually
trained for the Tour instead of a (Giro and Tour) double he never had done
before.

Quoted message said:

I just don't see petacchi winning the TDF no matter how hard he trains.
How many people iin last years race do you actually think could have won
gc if they had better condtioning?

--

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

Quoted message said:

Curt said:

Quoted message said:

I can't understand why he doesn't go back to what "worked" in 96 and
97.

Um, he didn't look too shabby in 2003. He is not in that form this

year

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

however.... yet. To me, he looks a bit over weight and he is not in

good

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

shape for someone of his potential. On the other hand, some people may
be saying he is fat and out of shape to get him motivated to challenge
Lance like last year. It surely was a fine race.
Curt

In the tour he looked great, yes, but he still couldn't get it done.

What if he had not been sick on stage 6, or if it had not rained during the
last ITT, or...he was in at the kill even though he did not expect it.
Neither did anyone on his team apparently. This year is different for w hole
host of reasons but the biggest one to me is that this is very likely the
last time Armstring and Ullrich will face off in the Tour. Think about it,
they are only a year apart and both enormously talented. Armstrong has
denied Ullrich the victory 3 times (while missing 2 other LA Tour victories)
and last year was so damn close that it would be veyr easy to look back and
see a few simple changes that could have made the difference.

The only reason Ullrich did not get it done is that at the start, he did not
believe he could be Armstrong and now he does. I don't blame him. Good or
bad fortune is not something to count on, but it is not hard to see when
looking back. Ullrich has had some bad luck and some of it was his doing,
but not all of it. This could be one of the greatest battles since Hinault
and Lemond.

Quoted message said:

Before the tour, he looked ok, probably better performances than any
other spring since '97. In '96 and '97 he was much stronger than any of
the following years on the leadup to the tour. But still he follows the
same program that has netted him second every year he competes since.

--

"remove the polite word to reply" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I think the Tour Weight is, for most riders, an unhealthy weight.
Lance looks older than 32 ( of course he had a terrible disease also).

Man, that is BS. Decide how you think he looks after he retires or not at
all. Unhealthy?

That is insane.

Quoted message said:

When it comes to losing weight your body really, really wants to keep
to maintain the highest resistance to disease etc, you have to be
pretty obsessive. You have to have an unusual cognitive setup to be
able to tolerate feeling like [censored].

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

Quoted message said:

"remove the polite word to reply" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I think the Tour Weight is, for most riders, an unhealthy weight.
Lance looks older than 32 ( of course he had a terrible disease also).

Man, that is BS. Decide how you think he looks after he retires or not at
all. Unhealthy?

That is insane.

do you think that 3% body fat for a month is not unhealthy?
Dave