Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Cycling history question
Quote | Reply
It seems tobe that up until the mid to late 80s cycling teams where put together on shoe string budgets and only the greats where really worked with. Over time more money has been put into every rider on the team making teams stronger as a whole.

Thoughts?

customerjon @gmail.com is where information happens.
Quote Reply
Re: Cycling history question [Mr. Tibbs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Mr. Tibbs, an interesting question. I've watched more of this tour than any in the past and all I can say is that Lance will win but only because of his team. US Postal has clearly been the best team in the tour from a "protecting/helping" the leader standpoint. With several contenders in the race this year, the team has become extremely important in putting thier leaders into position to win (or in their inability to do so). I look at USP setting the pace early in the climbs in the Pyrinees (which put the hurt on a lot of said contenders) and then being paced on the climbs by Azevedo as really impressive. It seems that USP has a plan everyday and it seems many other teams are out for a group ride. Lance is certainly stong enough to win the tour, but on a lesser team I don't believe he would be in contention; other riders would pick him apart and attack at will. With USP, nobody can attack because they'll just up the pace if they have to and drag you back in. Hope all is doing well and good luck (how about a little credit from Tibbs!!!??)
Quote Reply
Re: Cycling history question [EaganMNTri-Guy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The importance of the team setting the pace in the lead group is overblown. If Lance has three Posties leading him up the mountain, Basso has four Posties doing the same for him, doesn't he? The support from the team is much more important when there is somebody to chase down, and that is not the case that often the way this Tour unfolds. All stages end with a man to man fight this year, with all the domestiques gone. At that point it is much more useful to have dual team leaders than to have another domestique, as you can only make Lance chase if somebody important escapes. All the while before that point, when the domestiques are setting the pace, that high pace helps the strongest riders, whether they are wearing a USPS jersey or not.

As for the historical question, I think Tibbs' observation is correct but the end result is the opposite. Teams used to be much more structured with one leaders and the rest domestiques, so in a sense much like USPS. Slowly that has changed to include other riders in the team, riders who can go on break-aways, ride their own race, dual leadership, etc. A team like CSC wouldn't exist 40 years ago, it would be unthinkable that not every rider would work for the leader and do nothing else. Raleigh was one of the first teams to show up with a star-studded team, and after that teams like La Vie Claire.


Gerard Vroomen
3T.bike
OPEN cycle
Last edited by: gerard: Jul 20, 04 9:09
Quote Reply
Re: Cycling history question [gerard] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Finally someone has corrected this nonsense that Lance is somehow being pulled up the mountain expending less energy than his rivals. As if Azevedo on the front is punishing everyone else while Lance magically gets a free ride.



Is there even a draft on these difficult mountain passes? Seems to me it is just pace setting by the teammates, completely a physcological effect.

---------------------------------------------------------

"What the mind can conceive and believe, the mind and body can achieve; and those who stay will be champions."
Quote Reply