|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
evolution of a pro-cyclist....
There is no doubt that the cyclists at the tdf are the best of us, but how
much better is the question. When they are young they are "chosen" because they're a hair better than the rest of us. Then they disappear into the pro-cycling world. We of course continue to train, like they do, but then we soon discover that they aren't still a hair better than us, but twice or three times faster than us. What happened? Was it Carmichael training techniques that made them so much better, and they had a team that would pay for this enhanced training that they do? Or is it because.............as we are now finding out, that they have been introduced to a so and so Dr. Frankenstein, that re-made them, better than before, and much faster. Mixing, in his labs, custom formulas, after much testing of the bodies, the exact mixtures that will turn this above average cyclist, into a super-human. So now we are at the point that we want to get rid of these Frankenstein's, what will we have then? Will people continue to watch the European Tours, and put up with Liggett on Versus, or buy Cycling world magazine, if the heros are only a hair better than us on a bike. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
evolution of a pro-cyclist....
Callistus Valerius wrote:
There is no doubt that the cyclists at the tdf are the best of us, but how much better is the question. When they are young they are "chosen" because they're a hair better than the rest of us. Then they disappear into the pro-cycling world. We of course continue to train, like they do, but then we soon discover that they aren't still a hair better than us, but twice or three times faster than us. What happened? Was it Carmichael training techniques that made them so much better, and they had a team that would pay for this enhanced training that they do? Or is it because.............as we are now finding out, that they have been introduced to a so and so Dr. Frankenstein, that re-made them, better than before, and much faster. Mixing, in his labs, custom formulas, after much testing of the bodies, the exact mixtures that will turn this above average cyclist, into a super-human. So now we are at the point that we want to get rid of these Frankenstein's, what will we have then? Will people continue to watch the European Tours, and put up with Liggett on Versus, or buy Cycling world magazine, if the heros are only a hair better than us on a bike. Well, Carmichael has first hand experience with blod doping from the 1984 Olympics. I guess he knows what he is doing. -- Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) http://blog.reippuert.dk Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
evolution of a pro-cyclist....
So now we are at the point that we want to get rid of these
Frankenstein's, what will we have then? Will people continue to watch the European Tours, and put up with Liggett on Versus, or buy Cycling world magazine, if the heros are only a hair better than us on a bike. C'mon, you've posted far better than this. You make it sound like the only thing separating the 'Tour riders from yourself and others here are access to doping expertise. Right. I know it's a troll, and I shouldn't take it seriously, but there's a world of difference between a clean ProTour cyclists and anyone posting here. A much larger difference, I would say, than between a typical clean ProTour cyclist and one who dopes. There is no doubt that the cyclists at the tdf are the best of us, but how much better is the question. When they are young they are "chosen" because they're a hair better than the rest of us. There is some evidence that ProTour cyclists aren't always the brightest bulb in the room; perhaps that's where they come within being a hair better? --Mike Jacoubowsky Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA "Callistus Valerius" wrote in message link.net... There is no doubt that the cyclists at the tdf are the best of us, but how much better is the question. When they are young they are "chosen" because they're a hair better than the rest of us. Then they disappear into the pro-cycling world. We of course continue to train, like they do, but then we soon discover that they aren't still a hair better than us, but twice or three times faster than us. What happened? Was it Carmichael training techniques that made them so much better, and they had a team that would pay for this enhanced training that they do? Or is it because.............as we are now finding out, that they have been introduced to a so and so Dr. Frankenstein, that re-made them, better than before, and much faster. Mixing, in his labs, custom formulas, after much testing of the bodies, the exact mixtures that will turn this above average cyclist, into a super-human. So now we are at the point that we want to get rid of these Frankenstein's, what will we have then? Will people continue to watch the European Tours, and put up with Liggett on Versus, or buy Cycling world magazine, if the heros are only a hair better than us on a bike. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
evolution of a pro-cyclist....
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:42:18 GMT, "Callistus Valerius"
wrote: There is no doubt that the cyclists at the tdf are the best of us, but how much better is the question. When they are young they are "chosen" because they're a hair better than the rest of us. Then they disappear into the pro-cycling world. We of course continue to train, like they do, but then we soon discover that they aren't still a hair better than us, but twice or three times faster than us. What happened? Dumb**** - We have full time jobs. There is actually no further explanation necessary, I could elaborate, but that's actually enough of an answer. Nobody with a full time job beats a pro at an endurance event. Was it Carmichael training techniques that made them so much better, and they had a team that would pay for this enhanced training that they do? Or is it because.............as we are now finding out, that they have been introduced to a so and so Dr. Frankenstein, that re-made them, better than before, and much faster. Mixing, in his labs, custom formulas, after much testing of the bodies, the exact mixtures that will turn this above average cyclist, into a super-human. So now we are at the point that we want to get rid of these Frankenstein's, what will we have then? Will people continue to watch the European Tours, and put up with Liggett on Versus, or buy Cycling world magazine, if the heros are only a hair better than us on a bike. That "hair better" is all the difference necessary. A boxer who is a hair faster will pummel the **** out of his opponent every time. A hair better on a bike means not cracking versus complete meltdown. This is not subtle. What you refer to as two or three times faster isn't much but it's enough. It is enough that having to also perform a day job will make the difference. Ron |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
evolution of a pro-cyclist....
The physical difference is only part reason pros are better. And I don't
think it is as significant as most believe. There is a n element of "wild hair up their butt" that a normal person doesn't possess. Their ability to sacrifice all for success. That sacrifice is broad, it's from long and terribly arduous training sessions to increasing the dosage beyond the physicians recommended prescription. To be at the absolute top of anything there needs to be a couple of screws lightened. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
evolution of a pro-cyclist....
In article ,
RonSonic wrote: On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:42:18 GMT, "Callistus Valerius" wrote: There is no doubt that the cyclists at the tdf are the best of us, but how much better is the question. When they are young they are "chosen" because they're a hair better than the rest of us. Then they disappear into the pro-cycling world. We of course continue to train, like they do, but then we soon discover that they aren't still a hair better than us, but twice or three times faster than us. What happened? Dumb**** - We have full time jobs. There is actually no further explanation necessary, I could elaborate, but that's actually enough of an answer. Nobody with a full time job beats a pro at an endurance event. Not to argue with you, Ron, but Karen Kurreck had a full time job when she won the Worlds ITT. She was supposed to be back to work on the Monday after and got to stay an extra day or so, as I recall. But you're pretty much right. -- tanx, Howard Never take a tenant with a monkey. remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
evolution of a pro-cyclist....
"Morten Reippuert Knudsen" wrote in message ... Well, Carmichael has first hand experience with blod doping from the 1984 Olympics. I guess he knows what he is doing. Mort, Why would you say "first hand experience"? That's about as accurate as that ****wit DeCanio's pasting Gorski's picture on his little prepubescent rant of a webpage regarding the doping of the '84 US Oly team. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
evolution of a pro-cyclist....
I thought Shapiro was the alternate. Carmichael probably watched the
races from his apartment. On Jul 27, 7:46 am, Morten Reippuert wrote: Well, Carmichael has first hand experience with blod doping from the 1984 Olympics. I guess he knows what he is doing. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
evolution of a pro-cyclist....
"Howard Kveck" wrote in message
... In article , RonSonic wrote: On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:42:18 GMT, "Callistus Valerius" wrote: There is no doubt that the cyclists at the tdf are the best of us, but how much better is the question. When they are young they are "chosen" because they're a hair better than the rest of us. Then they disappear into the pro-cycling world. We of course continue to train, like they do, but then we soon discover that they aren't still a hair better than us, but twice or three times faster than us. What happened? Dumb**** - We have full time jobs. There is actually no further explanation necessary, I could elaborate, but that's actually enough of an answer. Nobody with a full time job beats a pro at an endurance event. Not to argue with you, Ron, but Karen Kurreck had a full time job when she won the Worlds ITT. She was supposed to be back to work on the Monday after and got to stay an extra day or so, as I recall. But you're pretty much right. In case you missed it - there were no women's "pros" when Karen won the worlds. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
evolution of a pro-cyclist....
In article . net,
"Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote: "Howard Kveck" wrote in message ... Not to argue with you, Ron, but Karen Kurreck had a full time job when she won the Worlds ITT. She was supposed to be back to work on the Monday after and got to stay an extra day or so, as I recall. But you're pretty much right. In case you missed it - there were no women's "pros" when Karen won the worlds. And???? In case you missed it, no one was talking about "pro" or "not pro' - besides, could you tell me how many of the other women that she beat that day had full time day jobs that weren't cycling? -- tanx, Howard Never take a tenant with a monkey. remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Evolution dvd ? wth ? | doubleflip | Unicycling | 31 | October 11th 06 10:01 PM |
Evolution dvd ? wth ? | forrestunifreak | Unicycling | 1 | October 11th 06 01:40 AM |
evolution in action | [email protected] | Mountain Biking | 16 | April 20th 06 01:47 AM |
Evolution?? ... of what? | Gary S. | Mountain Biking | 1 | September 8th 05 04:38 AM |
MTB evolution | DD5 | UK | 15 | December 27th 03 12:47 PM |