Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [Joe M] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This is where your naive. WTC thinks they are NASCAR, where the tail does wag the dog.
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [centermiddy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I have to weight in on this. While I think Lance is considerably faster than the top triathletes on the bike, I dont think its as big of a margin as everyone thinks. Did anyone see the Tour of California time trial. Lieto, McCormick and even Wellington were in it. McCormick finished 56th which is pretty damn respectable, and Lieto flatted with a couple of miles to go. At the half way point he was up with the top 10. Even Chrissie finished in 50 minutes which was only 9 minutes behind the leader.
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ngordonmd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ngordonmd wrote:
I have to weight in on this. While I think Lance is considerably faster than the top triathletes on the bike, I dont think its as big of a margin as everyone thinks. Did anyone see the Tour of California time trial. Lieto, McCormick and even Wellington were in it. McCormick finished 56th which is pretty damn respectable, and Lieto flatted with a couple of miles to go. At the half way point he was up with the top 10. Even Chrissie finished in 50 minutes which was only 9 minutes behind the leader.


You forget that the Pro Tour riders have ridden 700 hard miles prior to that final time trial. I don't think Chrissie, Macca or Lieto would even be in the same time zone had they raced 6 days and 700+ miles prior to that final TT.
Last edited by: Acsp34: Apr 4, 11 18:45
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ngordonmd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Macca lost 5 minutes in 20 miles......while you can't extrapolate that directly to 112 miles (duh...completely different intensity level), to me that is a pretty big time gap over a longer distance.

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [Acsp34] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Lieto sometimes stage races in the off season. regardless, pro triathletes are pro triathletes and pro cyclists are pro cyclists. There's a reason why each group is better at what they do. No doubt Lance Armstrong will have one of the best rides ever at Kona, a la Steve Larsen. I also think however, that some of the uber bikers could stay on his wheel, so if he races it will be a game changer.

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [centermiddy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
centermiddy wrote:
This is where your naive. WTC thinks they are NASCAR, where the tail does wag the dog.
Well if your opinion is valid... then, I guess the best phrase is... sometimes, you just can't fix stupid.
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ericM35-39] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think lance wants to stay relevant so he can continue to bring attention to Livestrong. Once he stops competing at "something" interest in Livestrong drops off pretty quickly. I don't think he is doing 2.4mi OW swim races to stay fit, he has a purpose. WTC would be making a huge mistake by not letting him race from the front, however they categorize his entry. Hell, Versus may even get live coverage if Lance races. I know I will be glued to ironman.com along with 95% of ST'ers

John

Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [Joe M] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Lance is not a sustainable asset. He'll be there one year, two at most, and then gone. His sponsors will leave with him. WTC has no trouble selling out their races, hawking you there goods, pawning you off on their vendors. They don't need Lance to make money. In fact, the way Lance works he will make money of himself, but you won't -- that's the price he extracts. However, as many here suggest they will torch all the goodwill they have with their athletes. How is this good for WTC? Explain the quality of earnings to me. Don't try too hard because the math does not work.
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [centermiddy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Lance will not help to sell merchandise. He will sell TV time. There is a reason that the purse at Kona is 1.5 million and Arizona is $50,000, and that kind of money does not come from entry fees. Its because its covered by NBC and with a major network spot comes sponsors like Ford and K-swiss and Timex. If Lance competes in Kona the number of people that watch NBCs coverage will probably triple, and so will the money that WTC will get for selling the rights to NBC to cover the event.
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [centermiddy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
explain what? the obvious... hmmmm.... I think I will just stick with... sometimes, you just can't fix stupid
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ngordonmd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There is a reason that the purse at Kona is 1.5 million //

Really? Are we talking Pesos here??
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ngordonmd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'd be curious if Lance raced, if they actually charge for any and all coverage (even the online continous feed) the years he is doing it. (I assume it's free currently).

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [Joe M] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Then you have no real business sense. You just want Lance to race so you all your buddies at work/the gym/your church/whatever can identify with what you do. Lance does nothing economically for WTC, so there can't be any other explanation. If Lance costs WTC money, I don't see how being ambivalent about his participation is, in your words, "stupid".
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ngordonmd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ngordonmd wrote:
I have to weight in on this. While I think Lance is considerably faster than the top triathletes on the bike, I dont think its as big of a margin as everyone thinks.
Tony Martin was about 10% faster than Macca. Is there any reason you couldn't just extrapolate that over 112 miles? Tony Martin and Lance were pretty close in 2009.
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [centermiddy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
centermiddy wrote:
Then you have no real business sense. You just want Lance to race so you all your buddies at work/the gym/your church/whatever can identify with what you do. Lance does nothing economically for WTC, so there can't be any other explanation. If Lance costs WTC money, I don't see how being ambivalent about his participation is, in your words, "stupid".


Are you really saying that Lance racing in Kona wont give WTC a huge opportunity with marketing/advertising/media coverage (and they wont take advantage of that)? Edit: That is where I think we differ. I think WTC will simply "do what it has to do", to take advantage of having Lance in the race, while you seem to suggest that Lance Armstrong will just be "racer # 456 and thats it.

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Last edited by: bad929: Apr 4, 11 21:46
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [gregf83] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gregf83 wrote:
ngordonmd wrote:
I have to weight in on this. While I think Lance is considerably faster than the top triathletes on the bike, I dont think its as big of a margin as everyone thinks.
Tony Martin was about 10% faster than Macca. Is there any reason you couldn't just extrapolate that over 112 miles? Tony Martin and Lance were pretty close in 2009.

I wasnt trying to say that Lance would easily have the fastest bike split, I was saying that I dont think it will be as big of a landslide as some people think. How many minutes did Lieto finish ahead of Macca in Kona last year. I know it wasnt 10% but it was likely close to 4 or 5. While I dont think Lieto will hang with Lance, I think he may give him a run for his money. Especially if he puts a few minutes on him in the swim.
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ngordonmd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This is the point to take home. Selling all spots and merchandise doesn't matter, selling TV-rights does. How much does a network have to pay to broadcast the superbowl? How much for Kona? Not that I know, but I assume there's quite a difference.

I would also assume that "selling" Kona to the American public is easier than the TdF. Instead of three weeks of delayed broadcasts, you can have a quick summary of the swim and first half of the bike and then have quite a nice evening of TV.

That's for you in America of course. For us in Europe it will still suck.
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [earnstrom] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Come on folks. TV is how the world of big sports function. Lance+Kona=ratings! When he wins, our sport just might join the big time.

STIndiana
America Multi-Sport, Inc.
America's Half June 10, 2017
USAT RD Century Club
http://www.americamultisport.com
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [Stindiana] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Stindiana wrote:
Come on folks. TV is how the world of big sports function. Lance+Kona=ratings! When he wins, our sport just might join the big time.

If he rocks up and wins, what does it say to Joe Public about the quality of the MPRO field? I think it takes a step back in the public eye before it takes a step forward.

However, he still has to qualify doesn't he? WTC stated outright that there would be no wildcards to bypass the points system and I'm sure they said specifically that there would be no LAS in the MPRO field unless he signed up and scored the points like everyone else. I assume they keep AG spots for personalities and hard-luck stories; they could give him one of those, but he starts with us. Still gets him off the bike with some decent MPRO triathletes he can run with.

Personally, I hope the WTC have the nuts to tell him he isn't welcome to any special treatment and he has to sit by his PC on active.com a year in advance like the rest of us. Mind you, for the record, I also hope Novitsky nails him and he won't have access to active.com where they send him.
Quote Reply
Ratings: [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My point taken and one thing is CERTAIN. Judging by the Slowtwitch Threads Popularity, LANCE's ratings are off the roof. His Tweets have more hits then everyone on the net.

Love em or Hate em...YOUR GONNA BE TUNED IN! The TV and cable industry knows this. You can not deny that America wants to see him look back one more time!

Lance is paid BIG money to speek at different types of events. My question, will "Versus" or "NBC" pay him to compete and do some interviews? I would think so...
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [Stindiana] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Stindiana wrote:
When he wins, our sport just might join the big time.

I just threw up in my mouth. Just a little.
Quote Reply
Re: Ratings: [Tri or Die] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tri or Die wrote:
You can not deny that America wants to see him look back one more time!

Damn. Just threw up in my mouth again. Just a little more this time.

Please stop...
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [centermiddy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
centermiddy wrote:
Lance is not a sustainable asset. He'll be there one year, two at most, and then gone. His sponsors will leave with him. WTC has no trouble selling out their races, hawking you there goods, pawning you off on their vendors. They don't need Lance to make money. In fact, the way Lance works he will make money of himself, but you won't -- that's the price he extracts. However, as many here suggest they will torch all the goodwill they have with their athletes. How is this good for WTC? Explain the quality of earnings to me. Don't try too hard because the math does not work.

I'm confused. I thought the WTC was a business, in the business of making money....more money....forever. I am trying to think of a business that doesn't want to expand it's customer base to have higher profits...I am having problems thinking of one, maybe ytu can help me out?
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [M~] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Apparently I'm a real idiot because I don't understand how letting someone race Kona as a pro who has not earned his spot, and who will be fighting drug charges, is good for our sport, especially if he is later found guilty. If that happens, even the fanboys here will see him as one of the biggest sporting pariahs in history. Yeah, folks and money will then flood to triathlon if he is associated with it....
Quote Reply
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [Green Barf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Green Barf wrote:
Apparently I'm a real idiot because I don't understand how letting someone race Kona as a pro who has not earned his spot, and who will be fighting drug charges, is good for our sport, especially if he is later found guilty. If that happens, even the fanboys here will see him as one of the biggest sporting pariahs in history. Yeah, folks and money will then flood to triathlon if he is associated with it....

Lots of ifs and buts in that little tirade.
Quote Reply

Prev Next