I was just wondering how much in percentages would you credit Lance’s 4 tour wins to pure talent, his team, and his equipment? For instance are they all equal or is it mostly his talent.
James
Its mostly LA, his talent, his approach to the race, his dicipline, his physiology, etc. Other than the fact that his equipment is supremely fitted to him, his equipment represents no inherent difference with respect to the other riders in the peloton. How much better do you really think the Treks are than, say, Colnago’s C40 or Pinarello’s Montello TT bike? As for the team, well, he needs to have a REASONABLY strong team, since there is that “little” matter of the Team Time Trial. While the race cannot be won there, it can definitely be lost. LA’s winning margins would not be enough to overcome a poor showing there. Basically he needs to be in the running. He also needs a team that can control the race at key points. Nobody can be the strongest rider 100% of the time for the entire Tour. There are times any leader needs to be able to sit safely in the peloton, yet not worry about his main rivals taking a flyer. For that you need a team capable of sitting on the front. So then, mostly LA, probably 80% of the “winning formula”, then team, probably 20%, and I think equipment is a wash. If you want to give equipment 1% of the credit because LA spends so much time making sure it is absolutely right for him, then I won’t argue. But riders have beaten him in all of his Tour wins on all kinds of bikes.
The race is won in the final bits of mountain climbs, and in individual TT’s. The team’s role is a defensive one in all other settings – “Don’t screw up. Keep Lance safe.” His team helps, but no one on his team can stay with him when he gets up and takes off.
Let there be no doubt – Lance wins the Tour with individual heroic effort. While teams are important (and the best riders end up with the best teams) the Tour is won by an individual rider stomping on the competition in the most heated moments. LeMond won in 1989 despite being on what was acknowledged as the worst team in the race.
Watching Lance go up Sestriere four years ago, and the three straight climbs last year – I am simply astounded by his strength and passion. I watched pretty closely, and it sure seemed to me he was pedaling his own bike out there. Heras stayed with Lance as long as he could, but Lance simply rode away when money time came around. Just because a teammate is riding along with you doesn’t mean they’re riding your bike for you – especially on grades over about 6 percent when things slow down and get really, really hard.
Sometimes, athletes are a bunch of hype (note half the “big stars” in the NBA). Lance is the real friggin deal.
Sometimes, athletes are a bunch of hype (note half the “big stars” in the NBA). Lance is the real friggin deal. While I agree with you that Lance is the real deal, I don’t agree that half the big stars in the NBA are hype. There are 348 players on NBA rosters, maybe 15 - 25 “big stars” and hundreds of thousands of kids playing basketball hoping to get there. It is extremely hard to get to the NBA. To become one of those so-called “big stars” you talk about is even harder. There is hype involved, (as with Lance) but at some point you’ve got to back it up or bye bye hype.
I find it incredibly unlikely that LA would have it as good with any other team. Firstly no company other than an American one would allow a team to focus on one rider and a single event as USPS, everything with them is focused on and around the tour and LA from Jan to July regardless of other races participated in, even George and the classics is totally secondary and no company outside of the US would do this.
That said there are a handful of guys with the proven talent to win a three week stage race, Jan and Marco being 2, MP just finished 14th in the Giro and Jan by all accounts has come back strong with none of his associated weight issues hes had in the past.
Also Jans not scared of Lance so that makes July that much more interesting. As to the bikes, meaningless regardless of the hype you see, these guy’s all ride the best equip avail with the best mechanics etc etc so the differences are minimal if it fits.
So with any other team it would be harder for LA to persuade them to focus for 9 months around him, equip is meaningless but the combination of being allowed to focus as they do with his talent and the strength of the support makes it much easier for him to prepare to win le tour.
If it’s mostly the talent of LA then how come he didn’t win the gold medal and has not finished in the top ten of any event this year? I think the team play a bigger role than most people give them credit for.
Lance is an amazing athlete, but he is not the greatest cyclist of all time. He will probably turn out to be the greatest TDF rider of all time. He didn’t win in the Olympics in part because it is a one day event. He is a stage rider. He can recover and delivery a tremendous effort day after day. His powers of recovery are as important as his ability as a cyclist.
He doesn’t focus on the Olympics, or anything else other than the TDF. A team that is focused on the Olympic road race wouldn’t lose track of Jan the way they did in Sydney. Lance thought he was in the front of the pack and only realized otherwise when he saw Jan on the monitor. He didn’t win the time trial because he is not the best time trial rider, though he did get bronze which definitely doesn’t stink.
We live in a more specialized world. I don’t know if we will ever see another Eddie Merck who entered everything and won everything. None of this is to take anything away from Lance. As stated up above, he is the real thing.
Lance is my hero. I believe he could win the Tour with both hands tied behind his back. Or maybe even missing a leg. (Okay, sorry I just had one of those irritating moments.
you may have forgotten, but Lance was involved in a crash in late 2000, right before the Olympics and he was banged up pretty bad, he almost did not race the Olympics and could hardly hold a TT position.
If not for the crash I’m sure he would have bested Jan and Eki.
There is another Eddie Mercx that is dominating in every race they enter. Velonews just had an article about the person in their last issue. Genevieve Jeanson. If for some reason she does not win a race, it is just by a wheel width during a sprint. Not many (if any) riders nowadays will mix it up in the field sprint (and win) after previously winning a hilly stage the day before.
LA is a great athlete and does what he needs to do to keep his sponsors happy. TDF and SFGP.
“…There are 348 players on NBA rosters, maybe 15 - 25 “big stars” and hundreds of thousands of kids playing basketball hoping to get there…”
Yes, of course; your point is quite accurate. I happen to think that, overall, NBA players are the best athletes in the world. There are just a few, however, who despite their obviously huge physical talent, don’t have what it takes in the head to be winners.
If it’s mostly the talent of LA then how come he didn’t win the gold medal and has not finished in the top ten of any event this year? I think the team play a bigger role than most people give them credit for.
Because the question was about the Tour, not about one-day races with sprint finishes. The Tour is the centerpiece of Lance’s season, and the only race he peaks for. Let’s face it – the Tour is the Super Bowl/World Series/Olympics all rolled into one. The “regular season” is interesting, but it’s who wins the championship that counts. A pro cyclist would give his right leg to be a TDF champion over a gold medalist.
To bring the thread closer to Triathlon – during the years of Dave’s big run at Kona, did he win every time he raced somewhere? Hardly. In fact, Mark Allen pretty much kicked his butt everywhere they lined up together – except Kona.
Tim D only raced a couple times last year; had a pretty mundane showing at the Cal Half – the big show in HA was his focus.
Any given one-day race is not the measure of the best cyclist. Chance plays too much of a role. In the Tour, the best cyclist wins – team or no team.
Actually I think any rider would give their left N*t for a classic, a three week tour, a world championship OR an Oly Gold.
Wearing the yellow jersey down the CE in July is one of the pinnacles of cycling but you need to put what LA does in perspective relative to other riders of the past. Firstly outside of Amstel LA has rarely shown any interest in any other race, he already has the WC under his belt. The case can certainly be argued that Indurain and Mercx are far more complete riders, especially EM given their classics and other stage race victories. Even if LA wins a 5th Indurain has 2 Giro’s an Oly gold I think and a WC? who’s the more complete rider? I know, Lance…well not in the context of other 5 time tour winners, he could well be the greatest tour rider ever when all is said and done, but he will be at the expense of other results where as other riders have been more complete with classics, one days and other major tours and WC’s.
LA is the only rider that exclusively focuses on the tour at the expense of everything else before July and that is unprecedented. I hope he wins or at least rides well and we get to see what he can do in the TT’s and the mountains but dont blow it out of complete proportion, until LA came along all major tour winners were at least held in similar regard, only in this country is the Tour viewed as the only event in pro cycling that counts.
I some how think that Mario’s 40+ stage wins in a major tour is right up there as a great record, his WC, Museeuw’s record at PR at 37???
Personally I think you are wrong about the one days and the classics, if they were simply about luck how could JM win Paris R three times? how could LA finish so close to the front at Amstel year in and year out? how do the same riders finish at the front of LBL, PR, FW, GW year in and year out? one days are not about luck, they are about good riding and strong tactics and nothing illustrates that better than Hincapie last year in Roubaix where he got schooled, Amstel this year where TH capitalized on what essentially was a Rabobank / Postal pissing contest. That was ridiculous, it was theres for the taking and yet TH regrouped after falling to the back, getting team mates back up to the front and goes on to win, WTF?
There are big tour riders and there are classic riders and there are some that have managed to be the real deal, the complete cyclist, at present LA is a single event specialist, or at least he has been post cancer, now whether that changes or not will determine how he is viewed historically as being better than Mercx, Hinault or Indurain. Either way in my opinion, as far as the tour goes he’s the most impressive rider I’ve ever seen and I started watching it in the Fignon, Lemond, Delgado era…
Steve Prefontaine won many events he entered and ran for the most part in a manner that might reflect EM’s ridign style, however, would it be fair to compare him to Haile to determine who is the “fastest” runner. For the most part, Haile peaks for a few events . . . and uses rabbits in many cases. Still, you can’t argue based on his times when he does peak.
What about American marathon runners, can we compare Bill Rodgers to Kahlid (yeah, it is a stretch to call him an american runner but it works well for my point)? Kahlid only peaks for one race a year but Rodgers won about everything he entered? Can we argue who is considered “better,” maybe “faster”
I think the same analogy applies to cycling (we did digress from the original post when we started comparing LA to past greats rather then the team component). Things change and it simply is not a valid comparison.
All sports with large amounts of money involved follow this trend. Is it fair to say that Dale Ernhardt was as good of a nascar driver as richard petty since he didn’t win 200 races? Is Shaq less of a player than Bill Russell since he hasn’t won as many titles ? You get my point, things change.
Andrew,
As usual, I agree with virtually everything you’ve said. To clarify my post: I think Lance wins the Tour because he’s the strongest, most fit rider come early July every year – NOT because his team gets him the win. It’s his win; and he’d win it with a far lesser team. That was the nature of the original question.
I don’t think or suggest that Lance is a greater rider than anyone else back through time. Again, simply that he deserves all the credit for his Tour wins.
I didn’t mean to imply that winning a classic is luck – I suggest that luck plays a bigger role than does luck in a tour. The strongest rider can get a flat right when the winning break gets away, or might miss the break entirely and get no help pulling up, or might crash in the finishing sprint. Clearly, those that win lots of classics and lots of stages are the best riders. But simply note that several riders win classics throughout the year – the wealth is spread around, like in golf. Not since Merckx has anyone dominated classics – and he didn’t win every time out either.
For all Indurain’s greatness, he didn’t win too many one-days, and no WC (although, in top form, on their best days, I’d wager on Indurain over Lance). For riders the caliber of recent greats (Indurain, Ullrich, Armstrong, etc.), winning the Giro is simply a matter of deciding to enter and take it seriously. Let’s face it, the Giro is not the Tour. Olano and other top-five Tour racers just don’t show up at the Giro in top form.
I, too, feel that Lance’s legacy will always remain tainted by his singular focus on one race. We will never really know his true place in the pantheon of cycling’s greats. But, to his credit, Lance doesn’t try to say he is something he is not. He doesn’t want to be the “greatest cyclist of all time” – he wants to be “the cancer survivor that came back to win Tours.” Those are his own words, and I respect him greatly for his honesty about that.
he’d win it with a far lesser team
Well, maybe not Ag2r or BB “lesser”. He’d end up having to pull the entire team in the TTT for 90% of the distance. It’d be a far different race if he ended up having to pull back 5 minutes or more lost on the TTT to teams like Once and even Saeco. Not impossible, but then those teams would also be racing different races if that were the case.
Bump for this klassic from 2003
.
Bump for this klassic from 2003
Seriously? So…no NEW Lance threads so everyone is going to search 3-9 year old threads to bump?
For f’ks sake, give a rest already.
John
i find lots of educational value in it so this is for all the 50 newbies who signed up today!
Want to lash out at senseless thread bump.
Can’t lash out without bumping thread.
#firstworldproblems