Tyler 3rd best American of all time?

On 22 Aug 2004 14:13:40 -0700,
) wrote:

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote in message . ..
On 20 Aug 2004 13:51:07 -0700, (NPA) wrote:


Better than Hampsten?

Not yet. If he keeps going the way he is, probably will be. But not
yet

JT

I diagree. Tyler DOES have a better record now.

Basically, Hamilton 2 Romandie cancel Hampsten's two switzerlands.
They were both 4th in the Tour and won a stage. So it comes down to:
Is a win in LBL and Olympic gold better than a Giro win?

Hampsten was fourth in the Tour of France twice.

Hampsten has three Tour of Italy stage wins (I think, it might be
two), I think Hamilton has only one.

Also, the Tour of Switzerland is probably a little bit more important
than the Tour of Romandie, except perhaps for Italian teams.

But yeah, LBL is a big deal. I don't think it's it, and an Olympic TT
win, are worth a Tour of Italy, but yes, that's debateable.

There is one thing we forgot though, which might put Hamilton on top
-- he won the Dauphine Libere.

Still, I think the Tour of Italy, clearly the second biggest grand
tour at the time Hampsten won it, puts him on top at the moment. But
reasonable arguments could be made either way.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

"John Forrest Tomlinson" wrote in message
...
On 20 Aug 2004 13:51:07 -0700, (NPA) wrote:

Better than Hampsten?

Not yet. If he keeps going the way he is, probably will be. But not
yet

I agree with John. I also think that Tyler is very close right now but that
he has to have a Grand Tour win.

And I'm still trying to figure out "won the Giro when the Giro was worth
winning". Just how dumb do you have to be to write something like that?

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:

Also, the Tour of Switzerland is probably a little bit more important
than the Tour of Romandie, except perhaps for Italian teams.

Romandie = french-speaking Switzerland ( les cantons de Geneve, Vaud,
Neuchatel, Jura, les deux-tiers du canton de Fribourg, et le
Bas-Valais).

-HD

in article , Bob Schwartz at
wrote on 8/21/04 9:50 PM:

psycholist wrote:
I didn't lose all respect for the guy, but I'm sure he left his mom, dad,
wife, coach and several others with their mouths hanging open when he
dedicated his victory to his dog. Hey, nobody's into animals any more than
I am, but a little perspective is a good thing.

My jaw doesn't drop until I hear a Kiwi dedicate a victory to his sheep.
And maybe not even then.

Bob Schwartz


How about VDB dedicating a victory to his dog?

I diagree. Tyler DOES have a better record now.

Basically, Hamilton 2 Romandie cancel Hampsten's two switzerlands.
They were both 4th in the Tour and won a stage. So it comes down to:
Is a win in LBL and Olympic gold better than a Giro win?

Hampsten was fourth in the Tour of France twice.

Hampsten has three Tour of Italy stage wins (I think, it might be
two), I think Hamilton has only one.

Also, the Tour of Switzerland is probably a little bit more important
than the Tour of Romandie, except perhaps for Italian teams.

But yeah, LBL is a big deal. I don't think it's it, and an Olympic TT
win, are worth a Tour of Italy, but yes, that's debateable.

There is one thing we forgot though, which might put Hamilton on top
-- he won the Dauphine Libere.

Still, I think the Tour of Italy, clearly the second biggest grand
tour at the time Hampsten won it, puts him on top at the moment. But
reasonable arguments could be made either way.

This is strange. When you guys try to compare TH and AH, you also
take 2.HC and WC races in consideration. Now that's an evolution!
Shouldn't it have to be: "TH: 0 GT's, AH: 1 GT = AH TH" according
to the american Merckx-Amstrong comparison rules (EM: 5 TDF, LA 6 TDF
= LA EM (ever)). Or does this rule only apply to LA?

Kenny

John Forrest Tomlinson Wrote:
On 22 Aug 2004 14:13:40 -0700,
) wrote:

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote in messag
. ..
On 20 Aug 2004 13:51:07 -0700, (NPA) wrote:


Better than Hampsten?

Not yet. If he keeps going the way he is, probably will be. Bu
not
yet

JT

I diagree. Tyler DOES have a better record now.

Basically, Hamilton 2 Romandie cancel Hampsten's two switzerlands.
They were both 4th in the Tour and won a stage. So it comes down to:
Is a win in LBL and Olympic gold better than a Giro win?

Hampsten was fourth in the Tour of France twice.

Hampsten has three Tour of Italy stage wins (I think, it might be
two), I think Hamilton has only one.

Also, the Tour of Switzerland is probably a little bit more important
than the Tour of Romandie, except perhaps for Italian teams.

But yeah, LBL is a big deal. I don't think it's it, and an Olympic TT
win, are worth a Tour of Italy, but yes, that's debateable.

There is one thing we forgot though, which might put Hamilton on top
-- he won the Dauphine Libere.

Still, I think the Tour of Italy, clearly the second biggest grand
tour at the time Hampsten won it, puts him on top at the moment. But
reasonable arguments could be made either way.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Didn't Andrew win Romandie in 1992?

But one thing, considering his LBL win: hampsten isn't nearly as goo
in single day races, so indeed, Tyler is the more complete racer.
compared both riders palmares and have to say that I was wrong
Hamilton is indeed getting closer to Hampsten as I thought

--
Tuschinski

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 05:20:20 GMT, (Horse DeLay)
wrote:

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:

Also, the Tour of Switzerland is probably a little bit more important
than the Tour of Romandie, except perhaps for Italian teams.

Romandie = french-speaking Switzerland

The reason Italian teams might take the Tour of Romandie is more
important than the Tour of Switzerland is because it is a final
tune-up race for the Tour of Italy.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

wrote:
I diagree. Tyler DOES have a better record now.

Basically, Hamilton 2 Romandie cancel Hampsten's two switzerlands.
They were both 4th in the Tour and won a stage. So it comes down to:
Is a win in LBL and Olympic gold better than a Giro win?

Hampsten was good for top results in Grand Tours for the entire
length of his career, with the exception of his last two years.
Even in cases where he was not the team leader. His palmares
beats Tyler's in both quality and depth.

The place where Hamilton has an advantage is in one day races.
But Hampsten was a factor in the Tour and the Giro for many
years, not just a couple.

Bob Schwartz

In article ,
says...


John Forrest Tomlinson wrote in message
. ..
On 20 Aug 2004 13:51:07 -0700, (NPA) wrote:


Better than Hampsten?

Not yet. If he keeps going the way he is, probably will be. But not
yet

JT

I diagree. Tyler DOES have a better record now.

Basically, Hamilton 2 Romandie cancel Hampsten's two switzerlands.
They were both 4th in the Tour and won a stage. So it comes down to:
Is a win in LBL and Olympic gold better than a Giro win?

I can't see two single day races besting a multi-week race.
--------------
Alex

NPA wrote:

What do you guys think? Is Tyler the 3rd best American cyclist of all time now?

Better than Hampsten?

-NPA

Well, too soon to compare. Hamilton isn't talking about retiring.

He will be, with another good year.