Is it just me, or are people deifying Lance Armstrong? His recovery from cancer, and subsequent win of the 1999 Tour was amazing, but his newest book has sorta pissed me off. I dont know if the person who actually wrote the book put this spin on it, but in the book everything is very black and white, there is him, and not him: no one works hard but him (ex. when David Millar (i think) calls him and acts astonished hes training in the winter), his team is lazy and only pull it together because of his guidance (ex. take anytime he talks to teammates in the book, esp the younger ones), and he triumphs even though everyone in the world tries to kick him when hes down (he actually claims that Jan didnt wait for him when he fell during the stage he won in the 03 tour. Ive got it on DVD, Jan did everything but get off his bike to help Lance catch up). For a man who won the most recent tour by one minute, and got four minutes from the TTT (meaning he would have lost if his TEAM, not him, was not the best), i think his book was way to full of itself. Also, i also hate how he, and now all the top teams focus on the tour. Didn’t Merckx win like 12 grand tours? Those guys raced all the time, I hope the new resolution goes through and forces these Tour divas to race more.
I havn’t read the latest book, and I don’t intend to. I’m really not a huge Lance fan, for a number of reasons. But a minor correction, USPS put about 45 seconds on Bianchi in the TTT, not 4 mins. The key stage was Alpe d’Huez, Ullrich lost a couple of minutes there, and was apparently close to having to drop out of the tour because of illness the night before. Without that one bad day, who knows what would have happened.
It would be great for guys to focus on the entire season rather than just the Tour. I guess that’s why I like the classics riders best, the Museeuw’s and Bettini’s of the peloton. I also like Millar, but I’m not really sure why.
For a man who won the most recent tour by one minute, and got four minutes from the TTT (meaning he would have lost if his TEAM, not him, was not the best),
I agree with most of your comments except for the above - the race is not that black in white. It is much more dynamic than that. Sure the TTT helped, but who knows what else would have changed if that would have been different.
"(he actually claims that Jan didnt wait for him when he fell during the stage he won in the 03 tour. Ive got it on DVD, Jan did everything but get off his bike to help Lance catch up). "
Uh, I’ll take exception to this statement…If it were not for Tyler Hamilton getting in front of the lead pack and telling them to slow down, Jan would have rode off into the heavens if he could have!..It was not Jan, but Tyler…Watch the footage again!
Ok, i did look at the footage again, 2003 tour, Luz Aridan (sp?). The camera is focused on Jan, right after the crash, as lance is working his was back. For those who know cycling, Jan is barely moving, cadence around 60, barely breathing, definately not going hard. For those who aren’t familar with cycling, here is an exact quote from the commentators, “He’s waiting, I think he’s waiting. He’s looking over his shoulder… Ullrich is NOT putting it on… Ullrich did not want to push the advantage” Those are exact quotes, i had the DVD playing when i wrote this. The fact that lance denies this in the book came up in one of the reviews of the book in bicycling magazine i think. Yes, Hamilton was putting his hand out, but well before that, Jan was waiting, Jan was waiting before Hamilton caught up to him (Hamilton was about 20 ft behind him) and how do you think hamilton caught up with him? Jan wasnt putting on the gas. See what i said, say lance is wrong, or not the greatest and people shit on you for it. Ive also checked some of the interviews, and i think that this claim by Armstrong might have been exaggerated by the author, because he never makes the claim during the tour. You know what this reminds me of, the Beatles. You know why i think the beatles suck? Because if you claim that even one song of theirs isnt perfection, people shit on you, “oh, you dont know good music” Just like lance, theyre amazing, very good, but not perfect, and not a god, like many people are making them out to be.
Lances recovery from Cancer followed by his 5 straight Tour de France wins will be the greatest athletic acomplishment in our lifetimes…you can choose the attitude you have about it, or even change your attitude about it from time to time but in the end you can’t minimize the acomplishment…common sense would tell us the guy ought to be dead, I also believe there will be no one in our lifetime who has inspired so many…I find your criticism petty…
I had the same feeling about the second book. The first showed him as a cocky guy who gets knocked down by cancer. The experience teaches him a lot about himself and the world around him. In the end it makes him a better person. The second book is the story of him slipping back to his old mind set, even though he states over and over that he’s different now. He says all the right things but it just doesn’t ring as true.
I agree. You have to separate Lance the athlete from Lance the man. Lance the athlete is amazing. Lance the man is somewhat disappointing, IMO. What he and his ghost writer say in the book does not seem to groove with reality.
Here’s hoping a nice guy from Marblehead can win the Tour this year.
I said his recovery and subsequent win were “amazing” Im not trying to minimize it, i just cant think of a greater adjective. Should i have just said, “I curse the English language for there is no word to describe His greatness”? I just said the **book **was very cocky and pissed me off.
You’re 100% right. Lance the athlete is amazing. His story is the most remarkable in all of sports. But Lance the man is a bit of a disappointment. I give him credit for his incredible will to win and fearlessness on a bike. But off the bike, well, that’s another story.
Someone else brought up a good point about performance enhancing substances: There is a huge difference between saying “I’ve never used performance enhancing drugs” and saying “I’ve never tested positive for performance enhancing drugs.” It is much, much more than semantics – those are two markedly difference statements.
RP
OK, I ain’t a huge Lance fan either. I used to be. really. His comeback from cancer was amazing. But sometimes his actions, and the actions of his team, speak very loudly.
What really struck me watching the DVD, was that after Beloki crashed, Sherwen asked him what was going through his head. His first comment to Sherwen was “well, i thought I would go down, I found a place to go though the field, blah blah.” (I paraphrase) Only after he was prompted by Sherwen did he express any concern for Beloki’s fate. Granted, he may have said something different previous to that which wasn’t on the DVD, but I can only go by what I see.
Also, found it odd when Marty Jemison dared to win US Nationals, he was then left off the Tour team and the next year, no contract. Same with Chann McRae.
I was also a bit put off when he chastised the French rider (forget his name) for talking about drugs, and that doping was still a major problem. That was only 2 or 3 years on from the Festina affair. And the whole bit around dumping the team’s trash during the Tour in 2000.
Well, this year’s Tour will be interesting, if everyone can make it to the start in good health. There are no less than 6 guys with a legitimate shot at winning:
Lance, Ullrich, Beloki, Hamilton, Vino, Simoni. Plus a number of longshots, like Heras, Mayo and Zubeldia
Should be fun.
What some people don’t get is there is **no **‘no doping’ in cycling. Everybody takes something. Some don’t know it (the cyclists). I know a woman who trained in Italy with a pretty big cycling team, and one night the woke her up and told her to sign some paper for ‘flu shots’, and the next thing she knows they are sticking 2 needles in her ass with EPO or some other drug.
The eventual winner is the one with the best genetics + the one who can hide his drugs the best.
Id want to have a beer with Lance! Tony Kornheiser on ESPN Radio once said he was one of few celebs/athletes that you could actually sit down and have a beer with. But who nows unless you actually do it. I dont think Jan was waiting, which wont matter this year cause hell need a motorbike to keep up with Lance. Go Lance!
- You don’t become the world’s greatest by having your first instinctive thought be about the well-being of your competitors. I don’t care if you’re talking Jordan, wayne, Petty, Ray Lewis, or whoever. This guys not only want to win, they want to beat you. They want to beat you in such a way as to discourage any ythought that you might be able to challenge them someday. The world’s greatest vathletes are typically arrogant selfish guys. It goes hand-in-hand. They may parry to te media a little bit. But in a situation of “you vs. me”, they couldn’t give two poops about you.
It’s almost a requirement.
edit removed drug statement … that’s another thread.
Lets look at this a little differently,Lance sure did not wait for Beloki! Any dissagreement? It sure did not look like Ullrich was attacking,maybe he did wait,but a least he did not attack
I know someone who DID have a beer with Lance at Bennigan’s on 4th street in St. Pete, FL. He was there for a junior national triathlete race. He was just as he decsribes himself in the book: affable, considerate, funny. A good natured Texas gentleman. (At least one person represents that state well!).
My thoughts: I found nowhere in “Every Second Counts” a portrait of an elitist. Yes, he explains his high expectations on everyone that works for or with him. This is completely expected considering his success. It also explains the theme of all his books: before Cancer he relied on his natural gifts for sucess and was lazy. Now, he realizes “every second counts” and seeks the highest level of commitment of himself for every goal he attempts. The guy truly looked at death, stared back, and does not want to waste a moment living life to the fullest (the anecdote of the cave he dives into is a perfect example of this).
If it was ever proven that he does use drugs to enhance his performance while riding, I would be utterly crushed. I believe in him and, although not a cancer victim myself, draw inspiration from him whenever I ride. However, I do believe him when he states he never took PEDs. (I do not know the quote exactly).
As for complaints regarding the drug testers themselves, I don’t view these as complaints. Lance was trying to explain to readers the extent of his testing. If he were to cheat he would have no time to “cycle off”. For god’s sake, these people demanded a test when his wife was in labor!!! He repeatedly states he understands the reason for the testing and accepts it as his burden. But he also uses it to his defense, and when something like this happens to you when your wife is in labor, I think that would entitle you to put it in your autobiography.
“If it was ever proven that he does use drugs to enhance his performance while riding, I would be utterly crushed. I believe in him and, although not a cancer victim myself, draw inspiration from him whenever I ride.”
First of all, I dont think its healthy to rely so heavily upon another person (who is a complete stranger) so that if they mess up, you become devistated. Also, that second part of what i have quoted here is exactly what i think is wrong with many people’s opinions of famous people (be they athletes or otherwise). Is lance an amazing cyclist? yes, but he is nothing more, he is just a man. “I believe in him and… draw inspiration from him whenever I ride.” This sounds like what most people say about Jesus, or Muhammad, or Abraham, or even God! I love watching his career, and i love watching him race, but whenever you make someone out to be more than human, you’re always going to be dissapointed, and might worse off in the long run.
Is lance an amazing cyclist? yes, but he is nothing more, he is just a man.
I think folks would be very disappointed to find out what their hero was like “after the game”. The amount of sex, booze, drugs, etc that goes on at the professional level (don’t know about non-major sports) is unreal. Now, when you add in road trips, being away from home, and it’s almost like you are 2 different pepole. The “home” guy and the “road” guy. Sorry, last sentence is getting off topic.
It takes a certian mentality (arrogance, warrior, etc) to reach elite levels, to remain there, and to excell at those levels. The type of attitude that requires is not always condusive to the restraint that not using drugs (professional and recreational), marital and family commitment, etc requires. The more media we have, the more of this we will see (Jordan, Bryant, Magic, etc). Certainly we’ve known it has been around forever (Babe Ruth, Mantle, etc).
I grew up with a sports psycho dad. He seems stunned that I say “I don’t care if my son ever plays high level sports or not. But, he will be a geek (i.e. smart kid)”. I’ve had perspective my dad has not (and will never) see. To guys like my dad, Bob Gibson can do no wrong. Ozzie Smith could almost have his picture next to Jesus. Ozzie smith got divorced b/c his family was not a priority (admitted so after his retirement).
There are always pros and cons to every person. We need to understand this. Doesn’t matter if they’re a runner, cyclist, 3rd baseman, quarterback, or the President.
IMO, being a fan of someone is liking them regardless. Growing up as a huge fan of Rickey Henderson, Dwight Gooden, Keith Hernandez, etc … I had to come to grips that my on-field heroes were not always the best, humble, friendliest, moral guys around. That’s okay. I didn’t expect them to show me how to live, my dad did that.
Good points, Ryan. I find I can be a fan of an athlete even if I’m not a fan of his actions off the field. There are very few, if any, athletes I would say that I actually admire because I don’t know them personally. I don’t know who they really are no matter what I’ve heard/read in the media.
Lance is one of the few big name athletes I’ve actually spent time around. My experiences with him were less than positive. I went to high school with him and ran on the track team with him. He wasn’t a very nice guy. VERY cocky. In my mind it was without cause. He was a good miler but not great. We didn’t really know much about that whole ‘triathlon’ thing he was doing. He certainly wasn’t very nice to me.
I admit it may not be fair to judge someone based on their behavior years ago, but it’s all I have to go on. Maybe he’s changed. Unfortunately whenever I see him, I see that really curly-haired kid that was a dick in high school.
Francois,
I certainly do not claim to encompass every athlete in one generalization.
Is it possible for athletes to be #1 without having the arrogant/superior attitude?
Sure.
Here is my reasoning …
-
Many athletes almost require a feeling of “I own you” towards their opponent, or a feeling of “you can’t touch me”. They create a mental illusion of themselves being so far above their opponent b/c when it comes down to it, the ego is a very fragile thing. It’s almost as if you are trying to convince yourself that you are industructable more than you are trying to convince others.
-
Like competition, the attitude is hard to turn on and off like a switch. We have athletes like Terrell Owens that are very emotional and will say whatever they feel at any time. Then there are athletes like Tom Brady and Lance Armstrong that are very cordial and almost seem innocent in their political correctness. I would bet internally, that the latter feel just as confident and just as superior to their opponent as the former, but express it in different ways.
Some athletes control themselves better than others, but IMO and in my experience, athletes are usually very similar in emotion, but express it differently.