There is a new story circulating today that a former assistant—Paul
Re: Armstrong doping question
Tue, 05 Apr 2005 10:15:54 -0400
jj <j...@jetstream.net>

Good reply. What I can’t understand is how can a recreational cyclist, knowing how difficult it can be to ride a bike well, let alone race can put down a pro cyclist. I mean I like to discuss my favorite racers and will sometimes joke about how one guy gets smoked but in my mind these guys, who really suffer, are freakin’ gods! I mean come on - we mere mortals can only look and be in awe. Obviously this ’Guy’ has never ridden a bike or has no comprehension of what it takes to be a pro rider, even one at the back of the peloton.

jj—jj

Actually, as crap as your reply. Guy cycles thousands of miles annually even though he isn’t a professional cyclist. Nor did he "put down" LA. he simply made the point that in his opinion, LA isn’t "the greatest". This is not belittling LA in any way, it just isn’t worshipping the ground his Nike’s tread upon ;-)

Cheers, helen s—wafflycat

In what way good? Good example of a straw man argument, or good example of missing the point?—Just

I don’t know either. And, if you spend a few seconds reading what I wrote instead of what Pat read, you’ll find that I didn’t.—Just

But which god is greatest? In the minds of most cyclists there is only one greatest, and that is Eddy Merckx. You don’t need to be a pro ball player to cheer on your team, you don’t need to be a pro golfer to cheer on Tiger Woods, you don’t need to be a Formula 1 driver to cheer on Michael Schumacher. Fans have favourites, and that means taking a partisan view. I challenge you to find a single armchair footballer whose view of the game is entirely untainted by team bias :-)—Just

The quotes are superfluous, my name really is Guy. True, I haven’t ridden a bike for over two hours now, and I rarely ride much more than a hundred miles a week. I have only raced three times, and never in a road race (one track race on a recumbent, two cross-country races) but I am one of the fastest cyclists I know. Actually one of the reasons I think most of those guys are on drugs is that even when I was substantially fitter than I am now, working out for an average of at least an hour a day in the gym plus cycling 15 miles round trip to work every day, my flat-out speed on the road was still slower than Lance rides up mountains. Some of that will be genetic, some of it age, some of it training, but looking at the incredible increases in performance over very short periods (essentially zero in evolutionary terms) I can’t believe that no chemicals are involved. I could be wrong, but the periodic high-profile doping scandals suggest not.—Just

Why can’t someone who has a tremendously strong work ethic in training, combined with specialization in one event, not to mention probable natural physiological ability (his lung power is supposed to be tremendous), not end up being so dominant among his racing peers?

Do you think Merckx was doing anything hokey in dominating his sport so thoroughly for so long?

SMH—Stephen