Iban Mayo is LA's only challenger

(Norm T) wrote in message om...

Fewer mountaintop finishes doesn't necessarily make it an easier
course. The few that are there are going to be raced harder. This
makes room for a few stages like yesterday's, with climb and technical
descent to the line, where a balls-to-the wall attackers keep everyone
riding at their limits to the line. Did you think yesterday was
boring??? Imagine bonking on top of the final climb yesterday or on
the stage to Morzine and trying to catch back up to the leaders. It
happened to LANCE in 2000. I think the organizers looked at the books
and thought this would be LANCE's weakness...hat he can't conserve
anything on the final climb. Too bad Salvodelli didn't make the
start. He probably would've been dropped on The Alpe already anyway.

(Norm T) wrote in message om...

Fewer mountaintop finishes doesn't necessarily make it an easier
course. The few that are there are going to be raced harder. This
makes room for a few stages like yesterday's, with climb and technical
descent to the line, where a balls-to-the wall attackers keep everyone
riding at their limits to the line. Did you think yesterday was
boring??? Imagine bonking on top of the final climb yesterday or on
the stage to Morzine and trying to catch back up to the leaders. It
happened to LANCE in 2000. I think the organizers looked at the books
and thought this would be LANCE's weakness...hat he can't conserve
anything on the final climb. Too bad Salvodelli didn't make the
start. He probably would've been dropped on The Alpe already anyway.

"Benjamin Weiner" wrote in message
...

Norm, you are going to have to train harder to top your 2001 Tour when
you attempted to predict the entire Tour from the prologue.

Thank your for the reminder about Norm T - I'd forgotten those wonderful,
wacky r.b.r. moments!

Andy Coggan

(Norm T) wrote in message om...
It is clear now. Iban Mayo is the only threat to LA. After what
happened at L'Alpe d'Huez and the stage yesterday, the contenders and
pretenders have been revealed. Ullrich doesn't look to be able to
keep up with the big boys in the steep climbs and I never considered
Beloki to be a serious threat to LA.

Ullrich hasn't even begun his tour yet, he will pick up a lot of time
in the itt (can you say olympic champion?) and is still LA's biggest
threat.

It had to be a challenger who
was new and whose abilities weren't fully revealed in previous Tours.
A revelation. This is the guy. Mayo has already proven that he can
beat LA in a prologue in the Dauphine, and shattered him on that climb
up D'Huez. This guy is young, climbs like a fiend, and isn't too
shabby on the TT. The only thing that might hurt him is the fact that
this Tour (those TdF idiots) is probably the easiest of the Tours
since Lance started winning. Hardly any mountain top finishes, 2 TTT
and 1 ITT instead of just 1 TTT and 2 ITT. This could really hurt
Mayo as his team is nothing compared to Postal. I don't see Mayo
winning unless he takes 2 minute chunks out of LA in the Pyrenees, and
that will be hard to do without mountaintop finishes. Its a shame,
the Tour committee was trying to design an easier course to make it
more difficult for Lance to win his 5th, but in the process, they've
made it easier for him as his main contender is a better climber. The
irony of it all, the foolishness of the French.

"Benjamin Weiner" wrote in message
...

I think he wins, but proves the axiom that it is physiologically
impossible to win six Tours.


That's a crock. It may be unlikely, but it's clearly not impossible when you
look at how many have won 5 in the last 50 years.

(Norm T) wrote in message om...
It is clear now. Iban Mayo is the only threat to LA. After what
happened at L'Alpe d'Huez and the stage yesterday, the contenders and
pretenders have been revealed. Ullrich doesn't look to be able to
keep up with the big boys in the steep climbs and I never considered

V I N O K O U R O V

Beloki to be a serious threat to LA. It had to be a challenger who
was new and whose abilities weren't fully revealed in previous Tours.
A revelation. This is the guy. Mayo has already proven that he can
beat LA in a prologue in the Dauphine, and shattered him on that climb
up D'Huez. This guy is young, climbs like a fiend, and isn't too
shabby on the TT. The only thing that might hurt him is the fact that
this Tour (those TdF idiots) is probably the easiest of the Tours
since Lance started winning. Hardly any mountain top finishes, 2 TTT
and 1 ITT instead of just 1 TTT and 2 ITT. This could really hurt
Mayo as his team is nothing compared to Postal. I don't see Mayo
winning unless he takes 2 minute chunks out of LA in the Pyrenees, and
that will be hard to do without mountaintop finishes. Its a shame,
the Tour committee was trying to design an easier course to make it
more difficult for Lance to win his 5th, but in the process, they've
made it easier for him as his main contender is a better climber. The
irony of it all, the foolishness of the French.

and V I N O K O U R O V.

Thanks, Ken.

Benjamin Weiner wrote in message ...

I think he wins, but proves the axiom that it is physiologically
impossible to win six Tours.


Impossible!? For the sake of argument, Greg Lemond (if he were member
of a different team) was capable of winning in 1985. Then he wins in
86, gets shot so he misses 87 and 88 and wins again in 89 and 90. I'd
say that's six years of physiological possibility.

Russ Baxter wrote:
Benjamin Weiner wrote in message ...

I think he wins, but proves the axiom that it is physiologically
impossible to win six Tours.


Impossible!? For the sake of argument, Greg Lemond (if he were member
of a different team) was capable of winning in 1985. Then he wins in

Only if he was on another team. Were he on another team, would he have
the same strength in support?

86, gets shot so he misses 87 and 88 and wins again in 89 and 90. I'd
say that's six years of physiological possibility.

Perhaps, but who knows what unknowns would have surfaced?

Russ Baxter wrote:
Benjamin Weiner wrote

I think he wins, but proves the axiom that it is physiologically
impossible to win six Tours.

Impossible!? For the sake of argument, Greg Lemond (if he were member
of a different team) was capable of winning in 1985. Then he wins in
86, gets shot so he misses 87 and 88 and wins again in 89 and 90. I'd
say that's six years of physiological possibility.

I know it's a crock, I just like the idea.

Lemond's moral victories don't count. Counterfactuals are
hypothetical: we don't know if his condition in 1990 would have been
the same had he ridden 87 and 88. Merckx got punched, Hinault had an
injury, Bartali or Coppi are the best counter examples IMO. However,
several people _could_ have done it, but for a variety of reasons -
bad luck, injury, wars, age creeping up on them, nobody _has_ done it.

Benjamin Weiner wrote:

Lemond's moral victories don't count. Counterfactuals are
hypothetical: we don't know if his condition in 1990 would have been
the same had he ridden 87 and 88. Merckx got punched, Hinault had an
injury, Bartali or Coppi are the best counter examples IMO. However,
several people _could_ have done it, but for a variety of reasons -
bad luck, injury, wars, age creeping up on them, nobody _has_ done it.

What is amazing about winning the Tour 5 times is the number
of things stacked against you. Fitness and preparation is
not enough. You have to avoid crashes, illness, bad luck,
etc. Look at how many riders have had to drop out so far
due to illness or injury. To win 5 times without any of
those things happening to you is tough.

Todd Kuzma