Merckx: No. If Vinokourov beats Armstrong by three minutes one day and then loses them again the next day because Kloeden goes on the attack, it doesn't bother Armstrong at all. In the end, it all comes down to Ullrich beating Armstrong in the mountains in a man to man battle. That is difficult enough.

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

I think that's very insightful. Makes their triple-threat idea seem insignificant...

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Great interview, thanks for the link.

---

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks

Wow, great interview. I don't like the way he spoke about the French preferring to be on the side of the loser, though. It's more like wanting to root for the underdog - a subtle difference, but a difference just the same.

Interesting to hear how close he is with LA, and his insight into his motivations were well thought out and concise. Also, if anyone wants to know why Ullrich never reached his potential, Eddy sums it sums it up perfectly, and I like that he acknowledged his up-bringing in the East German sports machine - I believe it's a great explanation for Ullrich's lack of enthusiasm and that last bit of desire it takes to be a great champion.

"I was maybe the best rider of my time just as Lance is the best rider of his." Bam, there you have it. No further explanation necessary, and check the humility with which he made the statement. Very cool.

Great link - thanks.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

Definitely the underdog thing...but it's a common reaction in many places...even in Spain with Indurain etc...

I was thinking about why I root more for Jan, as honestly, I have never rooted for anyone in cycling before...I also realized that until after the Tour 2001, I was always thinking it was great for Armstrong to make that comeback and kick butt in the Tour. Then I arrived in the US and had to 'endure' 3 (and now 4) Tours here...by endure I mean that there are so many talking about Lance as if he was God himself, completely disrespecting great bike riders, people that have no clue that there are other races in Cycling (and big races!) and that includes OLN broadcast, OLN is even sponsored or having ads etc for the sponsors of Lance...everything is entirely biased, it's Lance, only Lance and that's it and the rest is just a bunch of average bike riders that should stop because they all suck...

Well, then I end up wishing that Lance doesn't win. I am sure I'd be watching the french broadcast with comments there I would probably thinking it would be nice to see Lance win #7...

Mercx: I learned from everry defeat. Jan doesn't.

That just about sums it up.

---

*
The Dude abides.

good point Francois.

Do you think LA himself has that respect for other riders? I mean, I'm sure he has a very good idea of how good he is, how deep his desire is compared to others.

But it also seems to me that he has a well calibrated feeling for where others' strengths lie.

---

kiwipat

per ardua ad astra

Pretty easy for Merckx to comment...he makes good points as to why Lance wins and Jan doesn't...but then comments like 'he should do this and that, he doesn't want it, doesn't work hard enough, he is happy the way it is'...
that's Bullshit...it's Jan's life. If he is happy the way it is and T-mobile is happy to pay him, why would Merckx say anything about Jan's decisions? They are Jan's only...it's his choice.

I understand Jan's view. Everyone needs to be happy. Armstrong seems to enjoy pain, Jan seems to enjoy his very limited time off.

---

*
The Dude abides.

Hard to say...we just get that image he gives to the media. He plays with the media a lot. I am fairly sure there are riders he respects, and some he doesn't (say Simeoni for instance...) but it's hard to say what is part of his 'media face' and what is the truth.

Besides, it's not really Jan's views...more what has transpired through the media, Merckx's perception of what's going on with Jan etc...
Maybe Jan is training really hard and is beaten by better than him. period. (beaten by better than him, yes, training really hard, not so sure)
Maybe he is happy the way things are.
Maybe he doesn't like biking as suggested by Eddy...
Lot's of possibilities...One thing is sure though, the management of Disco is a lot better than the management of T-mobile!

Great reply Francois. I am from Ireland and we also root for the underdog. I also was an Armstrong fan at first until I moved to the US. I also have to endure 'Le Tour dez Lance'. As a non-American of course I would be supporting the underdogs, Armstrong might be one of the greatest tour riders of all time, but it would be nice to see another winner for a change. It was the same during the Indurain era as well.

I also have to say that I am sick of people on this forum thinking that Europeans (especially French) hate Lance because he is American. Believe it or not, he is more popular than you think in Europe. The issue if any most people have if any is the fact he is Lance and not that he is American.

BTW, I love seeing Americans doing well in races, it is needed for the sport over here, and it looks like there is a lot of talent coming up. In Ireland we had Sean Kelly and Steven Roche, and during their success the whole country supported them, the Tour even came over to Dublin, but alas now that they are long retired, the tour isn't even on TV anymore. Let's hope that does not matter here.

---

Thanks!

He didn't learn much, I guess ...

Just on the underdog or loser theme there's a great interview with Laurent Fignon in one of the UK cycle mags this month (can't remember which) in which he says that he when he won the Tour in 84 the French didn't warm to him viewing him as aloof and arrogant. He's apparently far more famous and respected in france for his famous 89 loss to Greg Lemond and reckons this sort of reaction is typically French.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

Francois,

I understand your points. I don't know if it makes any difference, but realize also that before Lance made his comeback and began winning Tours, competitive cycling wasn't even on the radar screen in this country. If Lance had never "happened" (and assuming no other American had filled that void), there would probably be no OLN coverage whatsoever, no daily Tour updates on the American news, etc. The majority of Americans would still look at cycling as something just for a bunch of little European guys with funny names. So maybe our media's coverage is a bit misguided and maybe our unique enthusiasm for one man is a bit too much for a European (or even one of the rare Americans who was a cycling aficionado before Lance). But I do thnk there hes been a trickle-down effect, and even if Lance's departure next year drops cycling's current popularity by 50 percent in this country, it's still light years ahead of where it was before 1999. Lance's impact on cycling in this country can't be underestimated, and if the American media and Americans in general act like they worship the man, well, that's just the way things work here!

i'm in your camp on this.

As a cyclist I admire Lance for his ability and what he's done to garner visibility for cycling, but as a sports fan in general, the last few tours have been unwatchable. I felt the same way during the Indurain era. It became unbearable after his (both Lance and Big Mig) 3rd win. It's always the same story.

Do well in prologue
Be quiet during flat stages
Win or come in close second in TT
Dominate at least 1 mountain stage
Be quiet for a few flat stages
Destroy your last rivals in final TT

Sure there have been some exciting moments, but the overall plot and end result is never in question. Reruns of old TV shows are more interesting to watch.

I am not blaming Lance for this. It's his job is to win, and win he does. More power to him. Just don't expect me to watch and cheer him on. I'm ready to move on.

For golf fans out there, this is like Tiger's run a few years back. All he did was live for Majors, didn't care about any other tourney and didn't have to. Everyone knew he would win each major, and it made it difficult to watch (if you enjoy watching golf at all). So everyone started pulling against him. There is no golfer in the world I would pay to watch except Tiger, you have to be awed by his game. But that doesn't mean you have to pull for him to win every tourney.

Same with MJ, I hated seeing the Bulls win every year, but couldn't get enough of watching Jordan.

Heh heh.

You should hear me go on about baseball. I don't really like apple pie either. The case for me doesn't look so good. My mom will vouch for me though.

=)

I think Merckx has earned the right to critique anyone he wants. It is funny how everyone forgets just how good he was.........
In 1967, he won the first of three world professional world titles. Armstrong has achieved the feat once, in 1993.

In 1969, Merckx contested his first Tour de France where he recorded the greatest feat in the sport's history by winning the yellow jersey, the King of the Mountains jersey, the green jersey and all three time trials.

Nowadays, no rider ever wins both the green and mountains jersey in the same Tour.

It is a record which will likely never be matched.

In other years, Merckx achieved the following:

1968 - Won Tour of Italy (also won King of Mountains jersey & green jersey)
1970 - Won Tour de France (also won King of Mountains jersey & eight stage wins)
1971 - Won Tour de France (also won green jersey) & world road championship
1972 - Won Tour de France (also won green jersey) & Tour of Italy
1973 - Didn't compete in Tour de France but won Tour of Italy (also won points jersey) & Tour of Spain
1974 - Won Tour de France, Tour of Italy & world road championship
1975 - Finished second in the Tour de France & broke the world hour record

In his career, he won the Tour de France five times (won 35 stages), the Tour of Italy five times (including 25 stage wins) and the Tour of Spain once.

No other rider can boast such an array of victories in the big three Tours.

Aside from winning the Tour de France yellow jersey five times, Merckx also won the King of the Mountains three times and the green jersey three times. Armstrong has never won either the polka dot (mountain) or green jersey (points).

In 1971, Merckx won 54 of the 120 professional races he entered. At his peak, between 1969 and 1973, he won 250 of the 650 races he contested. During his professional career, he won 445 of the 1,582 races he entered.

Nowadays, a cyclist like Armstrong rarely competes outside the Tour de France as he makes it his sole focus of the year.

Merckx used to race most of the year and often in most years, he contested both the Tours of France & Italy, as well as each of the one-day classics and many of the minor multi-stage events.

Merckx's dominance of other major races included:

Tour of Lombardy - won twice
Paris-Nice - won three times
Milan-San Remo - won seven times
Paris Roubaix - won three times
Liege-Bastogne-Liege - won five times
Amstel Gold - won twice
Tour of Flanders - won twice
Het Volk - won twice
Ghent-Wevelgem - won four times
Fleche-Wallonne - won four times
Tour of Switzerland - won once
Paris-Brussels - won once

Put simply, he was, and remains, a freak!

No cyclist has ever approached his record. It is a reasonable bet that nobody ever will.

Whilst Armstrong should be lauded for his achievement in winning a record six Tours de France, when it comes to the question of who is the greatest cyclist, Merckx wins hands down.

For mine, Merckx may well be the greatest living athlete, across any sport.[b][u]

The comparison to Tiger is good, although it's important to remember that during his big run a few years ago he was winning a lot more than just the four majors. He might have stated pretty clearly that his goal was to sweep all four in row, but he was winning a lot - there's a lot of money at stake week after week!

I'd also say that he is changing the way other pros approach the game. Once other pros got over being psyched out by him, they began to take a good hard look at how he approaches things. To use a terrible, but fitting, corporate-ese term, he's 'shifted the paradigm.' I think golf is only beginning to see his approach being put into action by other pros. And I have to think that somewhere out there are some cyclists who want to be the next guy to win multiple TdFs who are looking the same way at what Lance does.

I'm not sure if Lance is the one who truly shifted the para-dig-em, so to speak.

It all starts with his total emphasis on the Tour. This philosophy had it's beginnings with Greg Lemond.

Lance's method of his winning is straight out of the Indurain school, though.

I don't think he's changed the paradigm as much as perfected it.

I thought the comment about needing to accept defeat if your opponent was better, but learning from every defeat is what makes most good athletes into champions. It's the difference between being a good loser and being a good sport about losing when it happens. Even if you cannot be the very best in your sport (and almost none of us can be), the same attitude can make you into the best possible athlete and competitor.

on your response to JM3, I share the same feelings about Lance-mania and the total disregard for the other races/teams/players.

as many have pointed out, b/c of this idolatry, the available cycling coverage in the U.S. will suffer when TdF 05 is over.

jc

---

Dad, Husband, Weekend Warrior

Blog , JC Tweets

Ullrich IS a champion...
1 Tour, 1 Vuelta, 1 Olympic title...that's a champion. Not the biggest palmares, but he is a champ.
Exactly like Poulidor, he arrived at the wrong time, when he super freak with a fantastic team has the key for winning the Tour (Poulidor was even more unlucky..dealing with Anquetil, then Merckx! talk about freaks!)