LA v. MJ

Michael Jordan you say? You aren't seriously comparing the five time winner
of
the World's greatest sporting event with some participant in an obscure
colloquial
American sport are you?

F.

"Stephen Ferguson" wrote in
:

Michael Jordan you say? You aren't seriously comparing the five
time winner of the World's greatest sporting event with some
participant in an obscure colloquial American sport are you?

I'm certainly not one to defend Michael Jordan so don't
misconstrue this but if you want to bash an American sport as
obscure and colloquial, there are much better targets than
basketball. In fact, given the globalization of basketball, I'd
say that you picked the worst possible target. Try picking football
or baseball next time.

--
Wayne Menzie

"Wayne Menzie" wrote in message
...
"Stephen Ferguson" wrote in
:

Michael Jordan you say? You aren't seriously comparing the five
time winner of the World's greatest sporting event with some
participant in an obscure colloquial American sport are you?

I'm certainly not one to defend Michael Jordan so don't
misconstrue this but if you want to bash an American sport as
obscure and colloquial, there are much better targets than
basketball. In fact, given the globalization of basketball, I'd
say that you picked the worst possible target. Try picking football
or baseball next time.



Stephen's not the most observant.

From: "Sam"

And we mustn't forget Michael's little baseball stint. They are both
amazing athletes in their own right, and I say we leave it at that.

Actually I would argue that MJ's attempt at baseball works against
him. He was awful.


They weere actually talking about this yesterday on Tim McCarvers baseball
show. He had Hall of Famer Bob Gibson on and they were discussing Gibson's
basketball career, including his time playing with the Globetrotters. Gibson
was saying that he was actually better at Basketball, and liked it more, but
the money was in baseball.
Pretty amazing guy.
Bill C

Ingemar Svensso wrote:
lazysegall wrote in message
...
Steven L. Sheff wrote:
On 7/27/03 9:25 PM, in article
, "Steve"
wrote:
Congrtas to LA for a well deserved win. The dedication, the
mental strength and the superiority in his sport is really
amazing. Reminds me of Michael when he had total control of
Basketball. But who's the greater athlete?

MJ- the ultimate competitor, refuses to lose, always finds a way
to win, never failed in any level.

LA- overcame cancer, argueably in a tougher sport, the best
cycler ever.
Lance is hardly the best cyclist ever. The names Eddy Merckx,
Fausto Coppi, and Bernard Hinault ring a bell at all? How about
Jacques Anquetil and Miguel Indurain?
Tough one, isn't it?

Personally, I think they are tied, but if LA comes back next
year and wins his 6th TdF, he'll go down is the greatest athlete
of all times.

--Steve



I think you could be the greatest cyclist and not the greatest athlete
ever. Indurain was not a great rider and I don;t want to hear that he
was. I also think that Cycling is differnt now. Preperation has become
so scientific that a GC rider can only realistically peak for a month
or two. Look at Simoni. He was in top form for the Giro and then
looked like a differnt rider. To further support that point I think
that Heras will ride a great Vuelta.
Take a look at a guy like Vinokourov, he's been in form the whole year.
He's proof that you still can race at a high level all year. Simonis
form is the result of the fact that he hasn't raced between the Giro and
the Tour, that was his mistake, he didn't prepare enough for the tour.
I my opimion Armstrong is way too single minded to ever reach the
highest ranks of cyclists. He's always going to be one step behind even
if he wins his 6th tour. All the others in the 5-tour club have also won
the Giro, Armstrong hasn't even tried.



Vino raced at a high level, but he also cracked in the mountains one
day. If you crack one day in the tour now you will not win. Until
someone races the whole season and wins the tour my point stands...You
could argue pantani though.



--
--------------------------
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

Colloquial?

1 : of or relating to conversation : CONVERSATIONAL
2 a : used in or characteristic of familiar and informal conversation;
also : unacceptably informal b : using conversational style

Look. Just because the UK roundly sucks in this sport, there is no
reason for inaccuracies and misstatements.

Stephen Ferguson wrote:

Michael Jordan you say? You aren't seriously comparing the five time winner
of
the World's greatest sporting event with some participant in an obscure
colloquial
American sport are you?

F.

Sorry chaps, my mistake obviously. Who are the basketball World
Champions then?

F.

Michael Jordan you say? You aren't seriously comparing the five
time winner of the World's greatest sporting event with some
participant in an obscure colloquial American sport are you?

I'm certainly not one to defend Michael Jordan so don't
misconstrue this but if you want to bash an American sport as
obscure and colloquial, there are much better targets than
basketball. In fact, given the globalization of basketball, I'd
say that you picked the worst possible target. Try picking football
or baseball next time.

I wear Nike Poggio's that I bought two years ago. They are the best cycling
shoes I have ever worn. (I was a Sidi man for year). They are unbelievably
stiff - the soles are made out of Trek's OCLV carbon fiber and the shoe is
so darn light, it is amazing. Highly Recommend.

Oh the best thing about them - they are made in Italy and not by Nike. They
just say Nike on them.

Dan


"NS" wrote:

Who is stronger Superman or Hercules? Did Superman do Wonder Woman? Was
Batman really gay when he turned down a chance to be with Catwoman?
These questions are really baseless and need not even be considered. If
you are the absolute best athlete you can be (to yourself) then you
wouldn't have time to ponder useless inconsequential questions. Heck, we
probably shouldn't be on the NG. I think I'll go workout.

BTW... MJ made more money last year from NIKE than all of the Malaysian
NIKE workers (that build the shoes) combined yearly gross income. So
that doesn't necessarily make MJ a bad guy but it shows that people who
make the shoes lives don't matter to NIKE and are only cared for by
their immediate families. I've seen LA's Nike ad... It's a little
disconcerting given the previous statement I made. Do they even make a
cycling shoe worth it weight? I'm not sure I'd buy it if there
is/was...considering...

imho,
NS

(Ingemar Svensson) wrote in message . com...
lazysegall wrote in message ...
Steven L. Sheff wrote:
On 7/27/03 9:25 PM, in article
, "Steve"
wrote:
Congrtas to LA for a well deserved win. The dedication, the mental
strength and the superiority in his sport is really amazing. Reminds
me of Michael when he had total control of Basketball. But who's the
greater athlete?

MJ- the ultimate competitor, refuses to lose, always finds a way to
win, never failed in any level.

LA- overcame cancer, argueably in a tougher sport, the best
cycler ever.
Lance is hardly the best cyclist ever.
The names Eddy Merckx, Fausto Coppi, and Bernard Hinault ring a bell at
all? How about Jacques Anquetil and Miguel Indurain?
Tough one, isn't it?

Personally, I think they are tied, but if LA comes back next year and
wins his 6th TdF, he'll go down is the greatest athlete of all times.

--Steve



I think you could be the greatest cyclist and not the greatest athlete
ever. Indurain was not a great rider and I don;t want to hear that he
was. I also think that Cycling is differnt now. Preperation has become
so scientific that a GC rider can only realistically peak for a month or
two. Look at Simoni. He was in top form for the Giro and then looked
like a differnt rider. To further support that point I think that Heras
will ride a great Vuelta.

Take a look at a guy like Vinokourov, he's been in form the whole
year. He's proof that you still can race at a high level all year.
Simonis form is the result of the fact that he hasn't raced between
the Giro and the Tour, that was his mistake, he didn't prepare enough
for the tour.

I my opimion Armstrong is way too single minded to ever reach the
highest ranks of cyclists. He's always going to be one step behind
even if he wins his 6th tour. All the others in the 5-tour club have
also won the Giro, Armstrong hasn't even tried.

I agree with this. It will harm Lance's legacy if he doesn't
pull down a win in the Giro and/or the Vuelta. Even if Lance wins a
6th straight TdF, he'll still only have won a Grand Total of 6 "Grand
Tours". Merckx won 5 TdFs, 5 Giros, and a Vuelta= 11 Grand Tours.
Armstrong ought to at least try to race one of the other Grand tours.
If not, then even with 6 straight wins, I'd rate him no higher
than Anquetil, Hinault, or Indurain, and still below Merckx.

I my opimion Armstrong is way too single minded to ever reach the
highest ranks of cyclists. He's always going to be one step behind
even if he wins his 6th tour. All the others in the 5-tour club have
also won the Giro, Armstrong hasn't even tried.

I agree with this. It will harm Lance's legacy if he doesn't
pull down a win in the Giro and/or the Vuelta.

Well then I guess it's harmed for good as he hasn't indicated any
interest in racing either of these races at any time in his carreer.

Even if Lance wins a
6th straight TdF, he'll still only have won a Grand Total of 6 "Grand
Tours". Merckx won 5 TdFs, 5 Giros, and a Vuelta= 11 Grand Tours.
Armstrong ought to at least try to race one of the other Grand tours.
If not, then even with 6 straight wins, I'd rate him no higher
than Anquetil, Hinault, or Indurain, and still below Merckx.

Fear not it won't happen. He's on the way out.