It's that time of year when the Tour de France comes to close and 90% of American cycling fans think that the cycling season has also ended. This was the first Tour de France since 2006 when I was on a bike everyday that I didn't watch it on a daily basis. This made for interesting following. I'd like to not repeat this in future July's. In no particular order of importance here's what I took away from this year's Tour de France.
- Mark Cavendish gets two goose eggs for points on two sprint stages and still finishes 2nd in the competition? I don't think you'd be crazy to assume that Mark Cavendish has a chance to win EVERY sprinter stage. With a lead out, without a lead out, he obviously just needs 200 meters of clean road and it's over. Obviously sprinting is rough and tumble activity so there's never a guarantee that any sprinter will make into the last 200 meters to actually sprint, but if he's there, he's gonna win. It has to suck to be other sprinters right now. Without a crash you are just racing for 2nd.
- You've got to give it to Thor Hushovd, for a guy who was sprinting about as fast as a Cat 3 he did his best to collect points and build a buffer. But, when you come to the line with more than 5 other sprinters and you lose to all 5 of them every time, you're not going to win that jersey.
- Since I didn't watch the stage yesterday I didn't see the jersey controversy, but I'm going to take the opposite stance that almost everybody else I've read is taking and that is, Why does Lance Armstrong thing he's above the rules that everybody else plays by? If any other team shows up to the tour and decides they're just going to wear different jersey's this day, he'd be the first to say, "well you can't do that." But, that rule doesn't apply to him? I don't care if the jersey's were symbolic of those living with cancer. Aren't all 200 bikes he came to the tour with symbolic of that as well? I understand that Lance came out of retirement to spread the good word of cancer survivor ship and all that jazz and I'm not knocking that mission. But, I also feel like that became a pretty good story line to make up for the lack of wins during this 2nd run at professional cycling. When you're winning a bunch of races you often don't need a constant gimmick to try and over shadow your mediocre results or remind everyone that you're here for some other reason. Lance has stated that he's going to be doing plenty of non bike racing starting now, couldn't he have worn his 28 jersey's then?
- It also drives me nuts that the two guys doing velo center (who are terrible by the way!) Bring back Jason Sumner and Neal Rogers and the old format! Take the time to point out, "Lance isn't happy by the way" as the video shows Lance complaining about being forced to wear the jersey of the sponsor who's actually putting up the funds for him to joy ride around France. Who gives a crap if Lance isn't happy. The story line here should be, "Lance tried to wear a different jersey, but just like you, I and he knows, that's not in the rules."
- Somewhere in the Lance comeback tour I lost interest in the story and only wanted to see results. Obviously that didn't happen. But I also got fed up with the fake rivalry between he and Contador. I also got fed up with all the people asking if Lance was working for Levi once he started giving up massive chunks of time to go for a stage win. Seriously, 90% of RadioShack fans have no clue about bike racing. I know the fairy tale is sweet and all, but come on, Levi lost California when there were other guys in the race who were actually fit. No shot he even sniffs the podium of the Tour de France on a year when there's actually talent there.
- I guess I have to mention the "chain gate" incident. I read from velonews live update "Schleck drops his chain, Contador attacks." But really, that's not what happened. Schleck attacked, Vino and Contador respond, Schleck drops his chain. That's not even close to the same thing. If I'm Contador I'm not sure I stop right there either. Contador wasn't sitting behind Andy both riding piano, Andy's chain falls off and then Contador jumps him. Tons of pro riders backed up to the idea that if you start the attack and have a mechanical, sorry about your luck. Nobody's obligated to wait. Could he have waited, maybe, but he doesn't have to. I think too much was made of this, and most of it was made by the pro-andy and pro-lance and anti-contador factions out there.
- Looks like Contador is fallible. Who would've thought? I'm obviously not training with him daily so I don't know what differences he made to his tour prep this year but he lacked all sorts of snap that we've seen in the past. If going into this tour you had said that Andy would have set a tempo up the Tourmalet that Contador wouldn't be able to attack from, I'd have said you're crazy. Obviously he didn't need all that extra fire power to win so it's sort of a moot point. But, if Andy, or even somebody like Jani Brajovic, is close in the TTs, these races are still up for grabs.
- Some french dude won the KOM. 6 French dudes won stages. And a French guy won the most aggressive rider of the race, which seems like a dumb and impossibly subjective award, especially since the winner, Chavanel, was aggressive early and on the Champs-Elysee. But, you know, if some sponsor wants to put up money for it, no problem. But, with all this french success does that mean the French will have a contender in the near future? I don't think so. As Bob Roll said when I went to hear him speak recently, "the cheese is too soft."
- I know it's easy for me to sit here and be a Monday morning quarterback on Schleck's tactics. Maybe he was already at his limit on the Tourmalet or even other stages, but if I'm him I'd rather attack Contador repeatedly in hopes of gaping for whatever time I can get and run the risk of dropping out of the top 20 than ride a super fast tempo that he's holding on to and assure myself 2nd. I just feel like at that level, 2nd is as good as 15th. You either win or you don't. I can think of another promising stage racer who wouldn't attack when he was young because he was afraid of blowing up and losing his podium spot. That guys wasn't riding in this tour de france because that strategy basically has huge long term negative side effects. That rider, Tom Danielson. Let's hope Andy doesn't turn out like Tommy D in terms of long term racing success.
- If I were Chris Horner I'm on the phone with Johan saying, "Either I lead this thing at next year's tour or I need a release." He finished top 10 at the tour and part of his job was to fetch bottles. If he's not wasting energy going back and forth from the front of the race to the team car and back or chauffeuring a broken Lance up the mountains, he's at least in the group with Sanchez and Menchov. He's the ultimate teammate so he never once complained about doing his job as it was assigned, but seriously, it's got to suck to be the best guy on a team and have your chances of doing your best ride being weighed down with 7 bottles shoved into your jersey.
- I think a lot of Americans who thought that Contador didn't have a strong team learned some new names. I wasn't surprised at all that he had a solid set of climbers to help in the mountains. Daniel Navarro obviously opened some eyes. You don't have to a team of previous podium place holders to ride around france the fastest.
- No positive drug tests in this tdf. Does that mean that riders are clean or the doctors are better? Who really knows, but I guess we have to assume clean. Well, Petacchi seems like he's going to get busted again. You'd think after about the 4th or 5th time his name gets brought up in this stuff he'd have figured out the right amount of inhaler medicine that he can take and still fly under the radar.
- I almost forgot. Congratulations to RadioShack for winning the team classification. You made it such a big priority after realizing you had no shot at the podium with a single rider. Way to stick to the message throughout the race so that everybody was aware of just how important of a goal this was for the team. Oddly enough, I remember a few Postal and Discovery teams that laughed at this competition because it was meaningless. I think you have to notify whoever came in 2nd because I'm not sure they're aware they were racing you.
I guess I'm out of stuff to say. What a pity.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
What We (I) Learned from Stage 8
As luck would have it the entire staff of TeamLandall was far away from computer access during what has been the most decisive stage of this years Tour de France, #8. By the pure definition of decisive, people lots and gained time they either desperately wanted or couldn't afford to lose, yes it was decisive. But, I think in the grand scheme of things, it didn't show us all that much, and simply made for a new story line and one day of drama. I think it may be easiest and best, especially since I'm pretty late here, to do this in points rather than narrative.
Things that happened:
- Lance crashed. A lot. Bob Roll said that Lance never suffered a puncture in his 7 tour victories, and while I find that a little hard to believe, it's easily accepted that he basically had 7 years of insanly good luck. During those 7 years if he crashed, it was after the split had been made and at that point all the leaders are obligated to wait. When Beloki decided that going through a huge patch of melted tar at 50mph was a better idea than the perfectly good asphalt to either side, Lance was able to ride through a field without puncture. I'm not really sure what voodoo lady Lance paid for 7 years of good luck, but one things for sure, his check this year bounced.
Phil Ligget said if you're going to lose 2 minutes you may as well lose 10 and while I don't fully agree with him, I do see his point. I am on record before this race as saying Lance had no shot of winning and would be scratching to stay in the top 10. But nobody, not Andy Schleck or even Contador want to beat anybody because they had the worst day they've ever had on a bike. You don't want to beat somebody because they fell down. You want to be them because you're better and you want to get the opportunity to prove it. While I don't think anybody except maybe Phil Ligget and Trek bicycle riders really thought Lance stood a chance, this isn't the way you want to see him go out.
- I have a theory (go figure) about Lance and the peloton. Back in the day, Lance ran the show. He left the sport for three years and when he came back he wasn't the same dominant force he was before. There are plenty of stories of Tours in the past where Lance at the beginning of a stage would say, "ok guys, nobody races until the bottom of the first climb" and they'd essentially soft pedal as a group to that spot. When guys would attack out of that group it was Lance who would chase them down and bring them back into the fold. He had that kind of power. Since his departure, that power has shifted. I don't know who exactly has it, but it ain't him. There's now hope among "everybody" that Lance can win a stage. At this point, I'd be really surprised to see that happen. Not only because I don't think Lance is fast enough to win a stage, but also because I don't see the group letting him. I think there are plenty of people in the peloton who were somehow affected during the King Lance reign and can use this opportunity to exact some revenge. Not that I think he can win a long time trial anymore because he hasn't ridden a long time trial in 2 years that would lead anyone to believe that, but I think soft pedaling and attempting to have the freshest legs for the TT is his only chance. No Gifts right?
- Andy Schleck put the drop on Contador. As soon as Contador looked over his left shoulder I knew Andy was going on the right. He put in a great move and stuck with it to the line. Clearly waiting on Sanchez once he realized that Contador wasn't coming with. While it was a great move and it's tough to get a real perspective of speed due to the motorcycle with the camera riding beside them, it just didn't look as explosive as the moves we've grown accustomed to seeing from Alberto. Either way, that doesn't really matter, because for that day, it was enough, Contador couldn't follow it, and Andy is in yellow.
- Contador has got to be pretty satisfied with where he's at. :41 down on a guy that he beat by over a minute in last years last TT. Let's face it, :41 isn't enough of a head start in the prologue when they were all on fresh legs. I know Andy's the TT champ of the great cycling nation of Luxemburg, but even he can't be too comfortable with anything less than :90 going into the final TT. Contador wins TTs routinely and Schleck routinely talks about how he's improving. I'm not sure Contador needs to do anything but follow wheels. But, I think he's too competitive for that so we'll see some fireworks. Andy has got to repeatedly attach him. Even if he can only get 5-10 seconds at a time, he needs as much of a cushion as possible.
- I know I'm supposed to really like Cadel. He's tough and crazy. But, I just don't. He's a diesel engine and I just don't like that kind of riding in the mountains. As soon as Schleck attacked he went 10 guys backwards. He can't respond to any of that and nobody else seems to have too much trouble riding at his tempo. However, he has won races wearing the rainbow stripes so I think that's pretty cool. And, I guess it should be noted that the anchor attached to his new yellow bike on Stage 9 was caused by a broken elbow. The dude is tough. No doubt about that! Remember when Tyler Hamilton rode himself into 3rd overall with a broken collarbone from a crash in the 1st week? Sometimes I don't ride if I have a stomach ache. These guys are insane!
- Everybody stand by as Levi plummets out of the top 5 as soon as the third week hits.
- I'd probably be remiss if I didn't at least mention Ryder Hesjedal and the incredible first week he's had. He put on a show on the cobbles and has rode outside of himself in the mountains to stay respectively high on GC. Nobody saw that coming, not even his team. Hopefully this surprise success doesn't peg him as the future stage race hope of Canada. I think it's obvious he's better suited as a classics guy and the un justifiable hopes of tour de france victory have done more than one potentially great classics rider in, ie. Daminao Cunego, Sylvan Chavanel, etc. Still, he's put on a good show thus far. But, it should be noted that I'm sort of partial to tall, anorexic looking cyclists though. Go figure.
So that's it. That's what I think we learned from Stage 8. Stage 9 saw Andy and Alberto work together to stretch their lead even more. Barring a crash, it's definitely a race between those two. Sanchez is riding out of his mind and can't help but watch them go up the road. That's got to be frustrating!
Things that happened:
- Lance crashed. A lot. Bob Roll said that Lance never suffered a puncture in his 7 tour victories, and while I find that a little hard to believe, it's easily accepted that he basically had 7 years of insanly good luck. During those 7 years if he crashed, it was after the split had been made and at that point all the leaders are obligated to wait. When Beloki decided that going through a huge patch of melted tar at 50mph was a better idea than the perfectly good asphalt to either side, Lance was able to ride through a field without puncture. I'm not really sure what voodoo lady Lance paid for 7 years of good luck, but one things for sure, his check this year bounced.
Phil Ligget said if you're going to lose 2 minutes you may as well lose 10 and while I don't fully agree with him, I do see his point. I am on record before this race as saying Lance had no shot of winning and would be scratching to stay in the top 10. But nobody, not Andy Schleck or even Contador want to beat anybody because they had the worst day they've ever had on a bike. You don't want to beat somebody because they fell down. You want to be them because you're better and you want to get the opportunity to prove it. While I don't think anybody except maybe Phil Ligget and Trek bicycle riders really thought Lance stood a chance, this isn't the way you want to see him go out.
- I have a theory (go figure) about Lance and the peloton. Back in the day, Lance ran the show. He left the sport for three years and when he came back he wasn't the same dominant force he was before. There are plenty of stories of Tours in the past where Lance at the beginning of a stage would say, "ok guys, nobody races until the bottom of the first climb" and they'd essentially soft pedal as a group to that spot. When guys would attack out of that group it was Lance who would chase them down and bring them back into the fold. He had that kind of power. Since his departure, that power has shifted. I don't know who exactly has it, but it ain't him. There's now hope among "everybody" that Lance can win a stage. At this point, I'd be really surprised to see that happen. Not only because I don't think Lance is fast enough to win a stage, but also because I don't see the group letting him. I think there are plenty of people in the peloton who were somehow affected during the King Lance reign and can use this opportunity to exact some revenge. Not that I think he can win a long time trial anymore because he hasn't ridden a long time trial in 2 years that would lead anyone to believe that, but I think soft pedaling and attempting to have the freshest legs for the TT is his only chance. No Gifts right?
- Andy Schleck put the drop on Contador. As soon as Contador looked over his left shoulder I knew Andy was going on the right. He put in a great move and stuck with it to the line. Clearly waiting on Sanchez once he realized that Contador wasn't coming with. While it was a great move and it's tough to get a real perspective of speed due to the motorcycle with the camera riding beside them, it just didn't look as explosive as the moves we've grown accustomed to seeing from Alberto. Either way, that doesn't really matter, because for that day, it was enough, Contador couldn't follow it, and Andy is in yellow.
- Contador has got to be pretty satisfied with where he's at. :41 down on a guy that he beat by over a minute in last years last TT. Let's face it, :41 isn't enough of a head start in the prologue when they were all on fresh legs. I know Andy's the TT champ of the great cycling nation of Luxemburg, but even he can't be too comfortable with anything less than :90 going into the final TT. Contador wins TTs routinely and Schleck routinely talks about how he's improving. I'm not sure Contador needs to do anything but follow wheels. But, I think he's too competitive for that so we'll see some fireworks. Andy has got to repeatedly attach him. Even if he can only get 5-10 seconds at a time, he needs as much of a cushion as possible.
- I know I'm supposed to really like Cadel. He's tough and crazy. But, I just don't. He's a diesel engine and I just don't like that kind of riding in the mountains. As soon as Schleck attacked he went 10 guys backwards. He can't respond to any of that and nobody else seems to have too much trouble riding at his tempo. However, he has won races wearing the rainbow stripes so I think that's pretty cool. And, I guess it should be noted that the anchor attached to his new yellow bike on Stage 9 was caused by a broken elbow. The dude is tough. No doubt about that! Remember when Tyler Hamilton rode himself into 3rd overall with a broken collarbone from a crash in the 1st week? Sometimes I don't ride if I have a stomach ache. These guys are insane!
- Everybody stand by as Levi plummets out of the top 5 as soon as the third week hits.
- I'd probably be remiss if I didn't at least mention Ryder Hesjedal and the incredible first week he's had. He put on a show on the cobbles and has rode outside of himself in the mountains to stay respectively high on GC. Nobody saw that coming, not even his team. Hopefully this surprise success doesn't peg him as the future stage race hope of Canada. I think it's obvious he's better suited as a classics guy and the un justifiable hopes of tour de france victory have done more than one potentially great classics rider in, ie. Daminao Cunego, Sylvan Chavanel, etc. Still, he's put on a good show thus far. But, it should be noted that I'm sort of partial to tall, anorexic looking cyclists though. Go figure.
So that's it. That's what I think we learned from Stage 8. Stage 9 saw Andy and Alberto work together to stretch their lead even more. Barring a crash, it's definitely a race between those two. Sanchez is riding out of his mind and can't help but watch them go up the road. That's got to be frustrating!
Friday, July 09, 2010
"The (Bad) Decision"
Watching the news this morning made it pretty clear that the only people who are currently fans of LeBron James are, his entourage and anyone living in Miami. I didn't watch "The Decision" because I was in class. Well, that's not entirely true, I wouldn't have watched it anyway, but one thing is most certainly true, the method in which LeBron James used his free agency did not help his image and I would assume that he's actually running a net loss on fans, despite acquiring all of Miami-W(D)ade county.
I realize that all of the hype certainly wasn't LeBron James' fault. In today's media circus nobody could afford to be the network not giving you ridiculous predictions and updates on how many times he said anything that could be seen as a clue. I also realize that the cities/teams that put together recruiting campaigns were nothing of his doing. It's not LeBron's responsibility to call New York, Chicago or any of the private groups and say "hey guys, don't take a billboard asking me to come there." LeBron James didn't buy a billboard or ask actors and celebrities to make a video begging him to come. I think it's also pretty obvious that while these were probably seen as nice gestures, they had absolutely no impact on his decision to play in Miami.
It was pretty obvious that this free agency market was a unique situation for both players and teams. Other huge names, not just LeBron were hitting the free agency market and teams saw the opportunity to put together a "big 3" like we've seen in Boston the last few years and immediately started opening up cap space. Again, it's not LeBron's or any other free agents fault that their contracts all ended during the same off season. And it's certainly just good business to try and take advantage of those opportunities from both a player and management prospective.
I've always thought one of the things that made LeBron so unique is that even with his immense talent he tried to win in the town he was from. When he was drafted by Cleveland he didn't moan about how bad they were, instead, he put his head down and tried to win basketball games. For the last two to three years LeBron James was essentially the 3rd or 4th best team in the NBA and I can say that pretty confidently because he's never been surrounded by any other marquee players in their prime. Since being drafted LeBron James was the Cleveland Cavaliers, period.
But, even the people of Cleveland couldn't be too upset with LeBron's decision to go play somewhere else, somewhere with a legit shot at winning rings. Obviously there'd be some negative press but I think in a pretty short period of time people would realize that he really gave it a go. He tried the best he could to win with the team that Cleveland was willing to give him. It didn't work out, so he had to go else where. I think deep down the people of Cleveland saw the writing on the wall and the crucifixion of LeBron James would have been quiet and short lived had he held a press conference saying that he and the Miami Heat had reached an agreement. He'd thank the city of Cleveland for 7 years that helped him grow and shape him as an NBA player. He'd talk about what a privileged it was to play in essentially his hometown in front of friends and family on a nightly basis. He'd then say, it was time to move on. But, as we all know, that's not what happened.
No, instead, LeBron James revealed himself as one of the most self indulgent people on the planet. Anybody who creates an hour long special to announce the team they'll go play for has fallen a bit too in love with the lime light. I know he said the proceeds from the special would go to charity, but, that doesn't change my opinion. You just received a max contract and it's not as if you were begging for change before that. If you're so altruistic that you're just dying to donate some money, pull out the check book, you don't have to foster the spectacle that was already created. This incident, "the Decision," honestly changed the way I perceive LeBron James, and like I said, I don't think I'm the only one. The team player, hometown, grounded, image that he built for himself for those years in Cleveland all crumbled with this snafu of a PR disaster. I don't blame LeBron James for leaving Cleveland. If he had stayed I'd have questioned his sanity. But I think the last piece of goodwill he could have done for that city was to walk away as quietly and as respectfully as he could. But instead the show was produced, the decision was announced and angry fans in multiple cities burned LeBron James jerseys in the streets. I'm no expert, but I wouldn't exactly consider that outcome a success.
I realize that all of the hype certainly wasn't LeBron James' fault. In today's media circus nobody could afford to be the network not giving you ridiculous predictions and updates on how many times he said anything that could be seen as a clue. I also realize that the cities/teams that put together recruiting campaigns were nothing of his doing. It's not LeBron's responsibility to call New York, Chicago or any of the private groups and say "hey guys, don't take a billboard asking me to come there." LeBron James didn't buy a billboard or ask actors and celebrities to make a video begging him to come. I think it's also pretty obvious that while these were probably seen as nice gestures, they had absolutely no impact on his decision to play in Miami.
It was pretty obvious that this free agency market was a unique situation for both players and teams. Other huge names, not just LeBron were hitting the free agency market and teams saw the opportunity to put together a "big 3" like we've seen in Boston the last few years and immediately started opening up cap space. Again, it's not LeBron's or any other free agents fault that their contracts all ended during the same off season. And it's certainly just good business to try and take advantage of those opportunities from both a player and management prospective.
I've always thought one of the things that made LeBron so unique is that even with his immense talent he tried to win in the town he was from. When he was drafted by Cleveland he didn't moan about how bad they were, instead, he put his head down and tried to win basketball games. For the last two to three years LeBron James was essentially the 3rd or 4th best team in the NBA and I can say that pretty confidently because he's never been surrounded by any other marquee players in their prime. Since being drafted LeBron James was the Cleveland Cavaliers, period.
But, even the people of Cleveland couldn't be too upset with LeBron's decision to go play somewhere else, somewhere with a legit shot at winning rings. Obviously there'd be some negative press but I think in a pretty short period of time people would realize that he really gave it a go. He tried the best he could to win with the team that Cleveland was willing to give him. It didn't work out, so he had to go else where. I think deep down the people of Cleveland saw the writing on the wall and the crucifixion of LeBron James would have been quiet and short lived had he held a press conference saying that he and the Miami Heat had reached an agreement. He'd thank the city of Cleveland for 7 years that helped him grow and shape him as an NBA player. He'd talk about what a privileged it was to play in essentially his hometown in front of friends and family on a nightly basis. He'd then say, it was time to move on. But, as we all know, that's not what happened.
No, instead, LeBron James revealed himself as one of the most self indulgent people on the planet. Anybody who creates an hour long special to announce the team they'll go play for has fallen a bit too in love with the lime light. I know he said the proceeds from the special would go to charity, but, that doesn't change my opinion. You just received a max contract and it's not as if you were begging for change before that. If you're so altruistic that you're just dying to donate some money, pull out the check book, you don't have to foster the spectacle that was already created. This incident, "the Decision," honestly changed the way I perceive LeBron James, and like I said, I don't think I'm the only one. The team player, hometown, grounded, image that he built for himself for those years in Cleveland all crumbled with this snafu of a PR disaster. I don't blame LeBron James for leaving Cleveland. If he had stayed I'd have questioned his sanity. But I think the last piece of goodwill he could have done for that city was to walk away as quietly and as respectfully as he could. But instead the show was produced, the decision was announced and angry fans in multiple cities burned LeBron James jerseys in the streets. I'm no expert, but I wouldn't exactly consider that outcome a success.
Thursday, July 08, 2010
Just thoughts of little value
See title for description of what's to follow.
- Yesterday I witnessed the most bogus ticketing of all time. At the intersection of Rock Creek Park and Ohio Drive, continuing on Ohio Drive, the light was 2/3s out, meaning that only the red light was operational. As I waited at the intersection and cars went by I noticed that the light was out and there was a cop standing there with a whistle in his mouth. I assumed that because the light was out he was there to direct traffic as needed. Incorrect assumption! As cars went through the light changed from nothing to red with no usual yellow light warning as it was apparently out as well. The cop immediately stepped off the curb in front of the last car in line, blew his whistle, pulled them over and wrote them a ticket for running the red light. So let me get this straight, as a driver you're expected to predict the turning of the light to red so you don't get ticketed, but the city isn't obligated to immediately fix the light once it's out? Way to go DC! You just saved money on a few light bulbs and increased revenue at the same time. What a f'in joke. No way I'd pay that ticket.
- Before witnessing the ridiculous ticketing incident I apparently offended a shirtless, kmart mtb rider who confused his "bike" for one of those toys you rode as a ride that required a side to side motion for forward momentum. After essentially coming to a stop, saying "on your left" three times and then shouting so that he could hear me over his iPod, he got angry and sprinted after me for a slow moving confrontation. Apparently the explanation to his question, "why do you need to pass me?" was found sufficient when I said, "because I was going faster than you." He then apologized for cutting me off. For a second I really thought this guy was going to try and fight me or something. He seemed pretty angry. You never can tell what you're going to get from topless toy bike riders on your afternoon commute.
- This morning on the news some political expert was talking about Sarah Palin and was asked if she's running for president. He of course gave the same answer everybody does, which is no answer at all. Why the hell don't all of these people just say what's obvious, "nobody is currently 'running' for president since it's not an election cycle. However, it seems like she's doing her best to stay relevant when that time comes." 1st, why is that statement not an appropriate response? 2nd, who the f cares if Sarah Palin does anything? I would make some statement about no chance she'd ever get elected, but I'd only have to be reminded of the double term W administration to realize that dumb people vote in mass.
- The Tour de France is well under way and so far it's either been "epic" or boring depending on who you ask. I'm torn somewhere in between. Looks like Hushovd has already wrapped up the green points jersey. He has about a million point lead which I think is good. Since I don't have cable I thought I might be able to avoid the made up Lance vs. Alberto drama but no, even the websites I go to love to talk about some made up shit.
Check out this picture! Looks like they're BFFs to me. Of course Lance says he hasn't spoke to Alberto all race and has no recollection of this exchange. When questioned about whether he'd recall talking to his biggest rival as something that might stand out, he took his usual stance of threatening the journalist's life, calling him scum, calling his work ridiculous and the paper he writes for toilet paper. Apparently, everybody likes it when Lance does this because everybody seems to just nod in agreement. Must be good to be the king.
I found it pretty funny that after stage 3 when Lance lost the most time and Alberto rode on the cobbles great that most journalist just decided to leave the story alone instead of saying, "yeah, well, we really botched the prediction on that one." I was never really sure why everybody thought that Contador was going to have such a tough time on the cobbles anyway. I mean the guys a good bike racer, knows he needs to be at the front in critical parts of a stage. It's not as if because he's from Spain the cobbles are some sort of weird kryptonite that repeal anyone totting a fake gun. His ride on stage 3 was exactly what I thought it would be, smart. I really didn't think that stage was going to immediately ruin the hopes of any of the GC guys. The stage was less than 10% cobbled, but you'd have assumed that there were going to be tigers let loose on the side of the road by the way people were talking about it.
- Speaking of Kings, does anybody give a shit about where LeBron ends up? And who on his PR team thought that a 1 hour special was a good idea. I can't speak for the world but I'm pretty sure this free agency extravaganza has hurt his image. For example, this guy has 9,200 followers on twitter and posted this, I think it's a good indicator.
I know MJ only played for one team and Kobe's only played for one team, but none of this is good for LeBron James. Most people don't like to think about how much more money professional athletes make than they do for playing a game. So to make such a big hype over how much richer this already insanely rich person is going to get, just doesn't sit that well with normal folks. We all realize that athletes are a well paid bunch and that's fine, hold a press conference, put on the hat of your new team, and then report to practice. We don't need all of this hype.
- The World Cup has basically cemented for me the reasons why I can never be a soccer fan. The rules of soccer just don't make any sense and the understood rules and tactics are even worse. I've always disliked the fake flopping and crap that goes on, but this world cup seems to be even thicker with it. If your strategy to win is to simply lay on the ground and play dead, then you don't deserve to be there. I'm not talking specifically about Ghana. This happens in every game as soon as the time starts rolling. I understand that controlling possession is a good strategy in any sport, but in basketball there's a shot clock and if you foul someone the clock stops. In soccer, even if you foul the guy, he gets to take as much time as he wants to start the action again, meanwhile, clock runs. An arbitrary amount of stoppage time gets added on, unless you're in stoppage time, then it seems to be ignored. It's not a "beautiful game" as it's often described when theatrics are more important than skills.
I think that's it. I'm hungry and going to eat my 2 daily PBJs.
- Yesterday I witnessed the most bogus ticketing of all time. At the intersection of Rock Creek Park and Ohio Drive, continuing on Ohio Drive, the light was 2/3s out, meaning that only the red light was operational. As I waited at the intersection and cars went by I noticed that the light was out and there was a cop standing there with a whistle in his mouth. I assumed that because the light was out he was there to direct traffic as needed. Incorrect assumption! As cars went through the light changed from nothing to red with no usual yellow light warning as it was apparently out as well. The cop immediately stepped off the curb in front of the last car in line, blew his whistle, pulled them over and wrote them a ticket for running the red light. So let me get this straight, as a driver you're expected to predict the turning of the light to red so you don't get ticketed, but the city isn't obligated to immediately fix the light once it's out? Way to go DC! You just saved money on a few light bulbs and increased revenue at the same time. What a f'in joke. No way I'd pay that ticket.
- Before witnessing the ridiculous ticketing incident I apparently offended a shirtless, kmart mtb rider who confused his "bike" for one of those toys you rode as a ride that required a side to side motion for forward momentum. After essentially coming to a stop, saying "on your left" three times and then shouting so that he could hear me over his iPod, he got angry and sprinted after me for a slow moving confrontation. Apparently the explanation to his question, "why do you need to pass me?" was found sufficient when I said, "because I was going faster than you." He then apologized for cutting me off. For a second I really thought this guy was going to try and fight me or something. He seemed pretty angry. You never can tell what you're going to get from topless toy bike riders on your afternoon commute.
- This morning on the news some political expert was talking about Sarah Palin and was asked if she's running for president. He of course gave the same answer everybody does, which is no answer at all. Why the hell don't all of these people just say what's obvious, "nobody is currently 'running' for president since it's not an election cycle. However, it seems like she's doing her best to stay relevant when that time comes." 1st, why is that statement not an appropriate response? 2nd, who the f cares if Sarah Palin does anything? I would make some statement about no chance she'd ever get elected, but I'd only have to be reminded of the double term W administration to realize that dumb people vote in mass.
- The Tour de France is well under way and so far it's either been "epic" or boring depending on who you ask. I'm torn somewhere in between. Looks like Hushovd has already wrapped up the green points jersey. He has about a million point lead which I think is good. Since I don't have cable I thought I might be able to avoid the made up Lance vs. Alberto drama but no, even the websites I go to love to talk about some made up shit.
Check out this picture! Looks like they're BFFs to me. Of course Lance says he hasn't spoke to Alberto all race and has no recollection of this exchange. When questioned about whether he'd recall talking to his biggest rival as something that might stand out, he took his usual stance of threatening the journalist's life, calling him scum, calling his work ridiculous and the paper he writes for toilet paper. Apparently, everybody likes it when Lance does this because everybody seems to just nod in agreement. Must be good to be the king.
I found it pretty funny that after stage 3 when Lance lost the most time and Alberto rode on the cobbles great that most journalist just decided to leave the story alone instead of saying, "yeah, well, we really botched the prediction on that one." I was never really sure why everybody thought that Contador was going to have such a tough time on the cobbles anyway. I mean the guys a good bike racer, knows he needs to be at the front in critical parts of a stage. It's not as if because he's from Spain the cobbles are some sort of weird kryptonite that repeal anyone totting a fake gun. His ride on stage 3 was exactly what I thought it would be, smart. I really didn't think that stage was going to immediately ruin the hopes of any of the GC guys. The stage was less than 10% cobbled, but you'd have assumed that there were going to be tigers let loose on the side of the road by the way people were talking about it.
- Speaking of Kings, does anybody give a shit about where LeBron ends up? And who on his PR team thought that a 1 hour special was a good idea. I can't speak for the world but I'm pretty sure this free agency extravaganza has hurt his image. For example, this guy has 9,200 followers on twitter and posted this, I think it's a good indicator.
I know MJ only played for one team and Kobe's only played for one team, but none of this is good for LeBron James. Most people don't like to think about how much more money professional athletes make than they do for playing a game. So to make such a big hype over how much richer this already insanely rich person is going to get, just doesn't sit that well with normal folks. We all realize that athletes are a well paid bunch and that's fine, hold a press conference, put on the hat of your new team, and then report to practice. We don't need all of this hype.
- The World Cup has basically cemented for me the reasons why I can never be a soccer fan. The rules of soccer just don't make any sense and the understood rules and tactics are even worse. I've always disliked the fake flopping and crap that goes on, but this world cup seems to be even thicker with it. If your strategy to win is to simply lay on the ground and play dead, then you don't deserve to be there. I'm not talking specifically about Ghana. This happens in every game as soon as the time starts rolling. I understand that controlling possession is a good strategy in any sport, but in basketball there's a shot clock and if you foul someone the clock stops. In soccer, even if you foul the guy, he gets to take as much time as he wants to start the action again, meanwhile, clock runs. An arbitrary amount of stoppage time gets added on, unless you're in stoppage time, then it seems to be ignored. It's not a "beautiful game" as it's often described when theatrics are more important than skills.
I think that's it. I'm hungry and going to eat my 2 daily PBJs.
Monday, June 28, 2010
Friday, June 25, 2010
Tour de France, Predictions
As another blog I read, The Service Course, pointed out, the weeks after the Tour de Suisse and the Tour de France leave a lot of not much going on in the world of cycling. National Championship races and such, but I, and most people, don't really care who emerges as the top road racers in the Slovenia. What does that leave me and others who feel the need to share their views with tens of readers who have bookmarked their blog? Easy, time to make predictions. Like my dad used to, and probably still does say, "excuses are like assholes, everybody's got one and they usually stink." Predictions are the same. They don't mean anything. Nothing I say from here to the end of this post will affect a single outcome on the roads of the Tour de France. If I get all of these predictions wrong I will reference the previous sentence. If I get just one right, you better believe I will proclaim myself a prophet.
The Tour de France has four major competitions within the race itself. The Overall, or Yellow Jersey competition. The Points, or Green Jersey. King of the Mountains, the god awful, ugly polka dot jersey. The Best Young Rider (Under 26), or White Jersey. There are other competitions, like the team competition, which nobody cares about and is only vocalized as a "big goal" after nobody on the team ended up on the podium but 3 or 4 guys ended up placing high and so by default they win the team competition. Also, there's a most aggressive rider award given out daily and that person gets red race numbers the following day. I actually think this is really cool and I'd want to win it for a day if I were to race in the Tour de France, but it couldn't be more subjective and meaningless. (A quick tangent. It's only slightly more meaningless than the blue jersey they give out at the Tour of California which symbolizes the "bravest" rider from the previous day. They should change it to the most "popular rider" because it only goes to guys like Hincapie and other big names and is used a marketing tool for sponsors. Which is fine, but who are you fooling?)
On to predictions. I'm only going to pick the winner, except for the overall, in which I'll pick the podium.
Best young rider competition.
I always find this to be a bit of a trivial competition. Outside of Andy Schleck I'm not sure it's done a lot to predict future tour success. I also feel like this competition is often won by a young rider who happens to ride for a relatively weak squad which is why he's in the race to begin with. For example, if Tejay van Garderen were racing the tour, I'd pick him, but he's not. Since Jani Brajkovic is a couple months too old I guess the obvious choice now is Peter Sagan who somehow managed to win a bunch sprint and the Big Bear stage in the Tour of California. He also won a U23 silver medal at the cyclocross world champs a few years ago. He's either really talented or has a really good doctor, if you know what I mean. Either way, he'll win it, as long as his doctor doesn't screw things up.
King of the Mountains.
Am I the only one that misses Richard Virenque? A guy who seemingly got out of ever being suspended for doping by simply ignoring the charges. Am I also the only one confused as to why the winningest man in KOM competition history is shown time trialing in his wikipedia picture*? The TT is why he couldn't win the Tour. Weird.
Anyway, this competition is really hard to predict and is sometimes won by someone who finishes on the podium, or sometimes by a guy who gets into every break that happens to have a categorized climb and makes deals with his break companions for points. It's a tough one to predict because of that factor alone, but what you really need is someone who's a good climber, but who isn't on a team that stands much of a chance of winning the overall because they'll be free to chase points instead of setting pace.
Carlos Sastre keeps jumping out at me. He has no shot at winning the overall as Cervelo is clearly coming to the tour hedging every bet possible. Bet hedgers don't win the tour de france, they win stages, or, KOM jerseys, but, Sastre is confused and thinks he's the best rider in the world even when he's been dropped by everybody. For this reason, he likes to whine and cry about shit so once he's out of the GC he won't care about chasing KOM points. He'll blame his team and the secret flu he had going into the mountains and hell try and win one day. If he wins one day, he'll finish all the rest of the climbs in the grupetto next to Cavendish. How's that for a prediction?
I'm going to step out on a limb and go with Linus Gerdemann. He's got some tour experience and can climb really, really well. But I think he also realizes he's on a team that can't support him for the overall and probably isn't going to try to. Get yourself into some key breaks kid and bring home some points. My prophet like status is on the line here!
Points (not sprinter) Competition:
Just because a sprinter wins the green jersey every year doesn't necessarily make it the sprinter competition. True, the most points are on the finish line, but last year showed that you can win just one stage and win the green jersey. Thor Hushovd did just that, but also dragged his gigantic UFC fighter look a like frame over a few climbs to collect some points to build a cushion as well. (And, he may or may not have won because Cavendish was relegated on one stage and posted a goose egg for points, but that just depends on who you ask.) Even though it's not the sprinters jersey, a sprinter will win it, so let's talk sprinters.
Tom Boonen's won the green jersey a bunch of times. He seems slower than usual but if he starts the Tour, which is questionable, he's got to be motivated for it. If he's not, he may as well stay home because he won't make an impact otherwise.
Last year's winner Thor will be there, but, I don't know, he seems like the 5th fastest sprinter in a bunch of the good ones, and probably the 2nd fastest on his team after Heinrich Haussler. But I refuse to cheer for a guy with that hair cut and who is always wearing those stupid Ed Hardy hats. (Take a look at the URL this image was taken from "reallydope.com" enough said!)
As some one pointed out the other day Mark Cavendish has yet to finish even a week long tour yet this year. And even though he was clearly going to win before he decided to DDT Haussler in Switzerland, I'm not convinced he's in good enough form to make it over even the smallest of bumps before the finish line. He might be, what the hell do I know? But, his tooth does hurt, so there's that.
Nobody is going to be more surprised by this prediction than me, but I think of all years, this is the best shot Tyler Farrar has at a green jersey. I think Farrar is typically the 3rd or 4th fastest guy but he's won a few big races this year and took a nice little break and won some small race that not even locals have heard of last week. If he can get himself over the climbs, which, I mean, who knows, he's got as good of a shot as any.
Honorable mentions, Oscar Freire and Robbie McEwen. Both men have won the green jersey before and both are capable of winning bunch gallops without any sort of personal lead out train. It doesn't seem like that long ago that McEwen was absolutely untouchable in bunch sprints. Maybe the lack of Fast Freddy is the problem. I'm pretty sure Katusha can afford him. And Freire has already shown this year he's still got some decent top end speed by winning Milan San-Remo.
I'm still going with Farrar, but I hope it's McEwen.
That brings us to the big boy, the overall, the yellow jersey.
Of all the competitions, this one is the easiest to predict, at least the top step. It should come as no surprise that I'm picking Alberto Contador. I could care less about any of the preseason races. When it matters, he goes with the move that counts and then punishes everyone around him for thinking they deserve to be in the same bike race. If all the other teams conspired against him and worked together with their best climbers I'm still not sure anybody can beat him. Barring a crash or something like that, it seems pretty obvious that it's a race for second.
I think the race for 2nd could be interesting. I'm hoping the race for the top step is interesting, but I just don't know. Andy Schleck just won national TT championship in Luxemburg. I'm not sure that really means he rode very fast, comparative to beating the former Spanish TT champ, Contador. The problem with Andy's chances of beating Contador is pretty simple. He's never beaten him up a climb or in a TT. That basically means you lose right? If Andy can drop Contador by a lot, and by a lot I mean by minutes, he might be able to limit enough losses in the TT to hang on and win. But, that just seems like a best case scenario, and I'm not sure probably. Contador seems to falter in races that don't matter or at least that aren't long enough for him to make back up the bad day he had.
So anyway, I'm picking Ivan Basso for 2nd. Without much of an explanation than if he comes into the tour recovered from the Giro, he's a tough tough man and I sort of like the story line of him winning the Giro-Tour double since the last guy that won it was a doped up Pantani. You may or may not believe that the current Basso is doped up, but if he can pull the double, the comparisons would be fun to read!
Third, I'll go with Andy Schleck. I think Andy's got the best shot of beating Contador, but I think he'll kill himself trying and would leave enough room for someone else to slip in and steal away his chance to repeat on the 2nd step. I wouldn't be too surprised if this tour ends with some big gaps from the podium to 4th place.
Uh oh American bike race fans, otherwise known as Lance Armstrong lovers, guess who doesn't make my podium. That's right Lance. I don't see Lance finishing in the top 5. I think he's the 3rd or 4th strongest guy on his team. And while he'll absolutely finish higher than everybody else on RadioShack because they all know who's writing the pay checks, it doesn't mean it's right. I mean Jani won the Dauphine and Horner won the Tour of Basque country and they're going to usher Lance who's last win was at the Nevada City Classic in 2009. I know it's more valuable to sponsors and all that crap and I know Lance won 7 tours but this Lance ain't that Lance and it'll be nothing short of a miracle to see him end up on the podium, much less in the top 5. I see him getting beat by Cadel Evans and Bradley Wiggins, who I think is a total wanker. As you know I'm not a fan of Cadel's follow the wheels style but all I've seen of Lance is the former tour champ doing his best Cadel impression this year. Even if the wheels are following are fast ones, he's not beating anyone. I think Cadel will finish in all the same groups as Lance and TT better.
To recap, in case you got lost in the rambling, my overall is:
1: Alberto Contador
2: Ivan Basso
3: Andy Schleck
Young Rider: Peter Sagan
KOM: Linus Gerdemann
Points: Tyler Farrar, but really Robbie McEwen.
Viva le tour!
*After further copy/pasting of wikipedia pages for links I noticed that almost none of the pictures are relevant to what these guys are famous for. Who's posting those pictures?
The Tour de France has four major competitions within the race itself. The Overall, or Yellow Jersey competition. The Points, or Green Jersey. King of the Mountains, the god awful, ugly polka dot jersey. The Best Young Rider (Under 26), or White Jersey. There are other competitions, like the team competition, which nobody cares about and is only vocalized as a "big goal" after nobody on the team ended up on the podium but 3 or 4 guys ended up placing high and so by default they win the team competition. Also, there's a most aggressive rider award given out daily and that person gets red race numbers the following day. I actually think this is really cool and I'd want to win it for a day if I were to race in the Tour de France, but it couldn't be more subjective and meaningless. (A quick tangent. It's only slightly more meaningless than the blue jersey they give out at the Tour of California which symbolizes the "bravest" rider from the previous day. They should change it to the most "popular rider" because it only goes to guys like Hincapie and other big names and is used a marketing tool for sponsors. Which is fine, but who are you fooling?)
On to predictions. I'm only going to pick the winner, except for the overall, in which I'll pick the podium.
Best young rider competition.
I always find this to be a bit of a trivial competition. Outside of Andy Schleck I'm not sure it's done a lot to predict future tour success. I also feel like this competition is often won by a young rider who happens to ride for a relatively weak squad which is why he's in the race to begin with. For example, if Tejay van Garderen were racing the tour, I'd pick him, but he's not. Since Jani Brajkovic is a couple months too old I guess the obvious choice now is Peter Sagan who somehow managed to win a bunch sprint and the Big Bear stage in the Tour of California. He also won a U23 silver medal at the cyclocross world champs a few years ago. He's either really talented or has a really good doctor, if you know what I mean. Either way, he'll win it, as long as his doctor doesn't screw things up.
King of the Mountains.
Am I the only one that misses Richard Virenque? A guy who seemingly got out of ever being suspended for doping by simply ignoring the charges. Am I also the only one confused as to why the winningest man in KOM competition history is shown time trialing in his wikipedia picture*? The TT is why he couldn't win the Tour. Weird.
Anyway, this competition is really hard to predict and is sometimes won by someone who finishes on the podium, or sometimes by a guy who gets into every break that happens to have a categorized climb and makes deals with his break companions for points. It's a tough one to predict because of that factor alone, but what you really need is someone who's a good climber, but who isn't on a team that stands much of a chance of winning the overall because they'll be free to chase points instead of setting pace.
Carlos Sastre keeps jumping out at me. He has no shot at winning the overall as Cervelo is clearly coming to the tour hedging every bet possible. Bet hedgers don't win the tour de france, they win stages, or, KOM jerseys, but, Sastre is confused and thinks he's the best rider in the world even when he's been dropped by everybody. For this reason, he likes to whine and cry about shit so once he's out of the GC he won't care about chasing KOM points. He'll blame his team and the secret flu he had going into the mountains and hell try and win one day. If he wins one day, he'll finish all the rest of the climbs in the grupetto next to Cavendish. How's that for a prediction?
I'm going to step out on a limb and go with Linus Gerdemann. He's got some tour experience and can climb really, really well. But I think he also realizes he's on a team that can't support him for the overall and probably isn't going to try to. Get yourself into some key breaks kid and bring home some points. My prophet like status is on the line here!
Points (not sprinter) Competition:
Just because a sprinter wins the green jersey every year doesn't necessarily make it the sprinter competition. True, the most points are on the finish line, but last year showed that you can win just one stage and win the green jersey. Thor Hushovd did just that, but also dragged his gigantic UFC fighter look a like frame over a few climbs to collect some points to build a cushion as well. (And, he may or may not have won because Cavendish was relegated on one stage and posted a goose egg for points, but that just depends on who you ask.) Even though it's not the sprinters jersey, a sprinter will win it, so let's talk sprinters.
Tom Boonen's won the green jersey a bunch of times. He seems slower than usual but if he starts the Tour, which is questionable, he's got to be motivated for it. If he's not, he may as well stay home because he won't make an impact otherwise.
Last year's winner Thor will be there, but, I don't know, he seems like the 5th fastest sprinter in a bunch of the good ones, and probably the 2nd fastest on his team after Heinrich Haussler. But I refuse to cheer for a guy with that hair cut and who is always wearing those stupid Ed Hardy hats. (Take a look at the URL this image was taken from "reallydope.com" enough said!)
As some one pointed out the other day Mark Cavendish has yet to finish even a week long tour yet this year. And even though he was clearly going to win before he decided to DDT Haussler in Switzerland, I'm not convinced he's in good enough form to make it over even the smallest of bumps before the finish line. He might be, what the hell do I know? But, his tooth does hurt, so there's that.
Nobody is going to be more surprised by this prediction than me, but I think of all years, this is the best shot Tyler Farrar has at a green jersey. I think Farrar is typically the 3rd or 4th fastest guy but he's won a few big races this year and took a nice little break and won some small race that not even locals have heard of last week. If he can get himself over the climbs, which, I mean, who knows, he's got as good of a shot as any.
Honorable mentions, Oscar Freire and Robbie McEwen. Both men have won the green jersey before and both are capable of winning bunch gallops without any sort of personal lead out train. It doesn't seem like that long ago that McEwen was absolutely untouchable in bunch sprints. Maybe the lack of Fast Freddy is the problem. I'm pretty sure Katusha can afford him. And Freire has already shown this year he's still got some decent top end speed by winning Milan San-Remo.
I'm still going with Farrar, but I hope it's McEwen.
That brings us to the big boy, the overall, the yellow jersey.
Of all the competitions, this one is the easiest to predict, at least the top step. It should come as no surprise that I'm picking Alberto Contador. I could care less about any of the preseason races. When it matters, he goes with the move that counts and then punishes everyone around him for thinking they deserve to be in the same bike race. If all the other teams conspired against him and worked together with their best climbers I'm still not sure anybody can beat him. Barring a crash or something like that, it seems pretty obvious that it's a race for second.
I think the race for 2nd could be interesting. I'm hoping the race for the top step is interesting, but I just don't know. Andy Schleck just won national TT championship in Luxemburg. I'm not sure that really means he rode very fast, comparative to beating the former Spanish TT champ, Contador. The problem with Andy's chances of beating Contador is pretty simple. He's never beaten him up a climb or in a TT. That basically means you lose right? If Andy can drop Contador by a lot, and by a lot I mean by minutes, he might be able to limit enough losses in the TT to hang on and win. But, that just seems like a best case scenario, and I'm not sure probably. Contador seems to falter in races that don't matter or at least that aren't long enough for him to make back up the bad day he had.
So anyway, I'm picking Ivan Basso for 2nd. Without much of an explanation than if he comes into the tour recovered from the Giro, he's a tough tough man and I sort of like the story line of him winning the Giro-Tour double since the last guy that won it was a doped up Pantani. You may or may not believe that the current Basso is doped up, but if he can pull the double, the comparisons would be fun to read!
Third, I'll go with Andy Schleck. I think Andy's got the best shot of beating Contador, but I think he'll kill himself trying and would leave enough room for someone else to slip in and steal away his chance to repeat on the 2nd step. I wouldn't be too surprised if this tour ends with some big gaps from the podium to 4th place.
Uh oh American bike race fans, otherwise known as Lance Armstrong lovers, guess who doesn't make my podium. That's right Lance. I don't see Lance finishing in the top 5. I think he's the 3rd or 4th strongest guy on his team. And while he'll absolutely finish higher than everybody else on RadioShack because they all know who's writing the pay checks, it doesn't mean it's right. I mean Jani won the Dauphine and Horner won the Tour of Basque country and they're going to usher Lance who's last win was at the Nevada City Classic in 2009. I know it's more valuable to sponsors and all that crap and I know Lance won 7 tours but this Lance ain't that Lance and it'll be nothing short of a miracle to see him end up on the podium, much less in the top 5. I see him getting beat by Cadel Evans and Bradley Wiggins, who I think is a total wanker. As you know I'm not a fan of Cadel's follow the wheels style but all I've seen of Lance is the former tour champ doing his best Cadel impression this year. Even if the wheels are following are fast ones, he's not beating anyone. I think Cadel will finish in all the same groups as Lance and TT better.
To recap, in case you got lost in the rambling, my overall is:
1: Alberto Contador
2: Ivan Basso
3: Andy Schleck
Young Rider: Peter Sagan
KOM: Linus Gerdemann
Points: Tyler Farrar, but really Robbie McEwen.
Viva le tour!
*After further copy/pasting of wikipedia pages for links I noticed that almost none of the pictures are relevant to what these guys are famous for. Who's posting those pictures?
Thursday, June 24, 2010
People Like Soccer, Every 4 Years Anyway
I'm no huge fan of soccer. I follow what I feel like is a pretty typical cycle for Americans where I pretend like soccer doesn't exist until it's World Cup time. And then, I only passively pay attention to what is going on. Yesterday, the good old USofA beat Algeria in stoppage time, whatever that is, to advance out of it's group, or bracket, or whatever they call it. Even if you're like me, and had no interest in watching the actual game, the reactions of people who did watch the game are pretty incredible. I'll concede the point that there aren't many other times, not even in the Olympics, when an "entire" nation erupts in this fashion over a game.
Check out some videos that have been compiled here. It's well worth taking a look.
Check out some videos that have been compiled here. It's well worth taking a look.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
The Crash Heard Round the (Cycling) World
Much has been made about the crash the other day at the Tour de Suisse (that's Tour of Switzerland for those not in the know). The riders protested Cavendish the next day for about two minutes, which, I think is more like a tribute, but, what do I know? I'm not a super duper fan of Cavendish but I also don't hate the guy for winning which seems like the norm if you read the comments below any article about the guy on VeloNews.
I looked at the video (below) and the picture. and I find it hard to totally blame Cavendish for the crash. Watch at about 25 seconds and it's pretty obvious that Cav and Haussler have both come around the guy in blue on opposite sides. They both move to the middle of the road at about the same time. I've always been taught in bike racing that the wheel in front has the right of way. Take another look at the picture and the crash video. Maybe Cav impedes on Haussler but they were both moving off their lines to get to the center. Cav was in front, Cav has claim over this new line.
Now, it's important to note that the "rule" I just cited isn't written down, it's just understood. It's also understood that you don't talk bad about guys in the peloton because the next day you have to come back to the same office they do. If everybody in the group is pissed at Cavendish it can't be just because he's a cocky SOB. Every sprinter is a cocky SOB. That's how it works. Obviously in a sport where the cameras can't catch everything Cavendish's antics in the group have finally struck a nerve with enough people and his colleagues are reacting.
Like I said, I think the crash was just as much Haussler's fault as Cav's. I think crashes like this happen all the time in bunch sprints. The crash was simply the event the group needed to make a public statement. When it comes to sprinters I'm not sure if it matters if people like them or not. I'm inclined to think it doesn't. They all fight for position in the sprint anyway and nobody other than teammates are politely giving them room. The Tour will be telling...
I looked at the video (below) and the picture. and I find it hard to totally blame Cavendish for the crash. Watch at about 25 seconds and it's pretty obvious that Cav and Haussler have both come around the guy in blue on opposite sides. They both move to the middle of the road at about the same time. I've always been taught in bike racing that the wheel in front has the right of way. Take another look at the picture and the crash video. Maybe Cav impedes on Haussler but they were both moving off their lines to get to the center. Cav was in front, Cav has claim over this new line.
Now, it's important to note that the "rule" I just cited isn't written down, it's just understood. It's also understood that you don't talk bad about guys in the peloton because the next day you have to come back to the same office they do. If everybody in the group is pissed at Cavendish it can't be just because he's a cocky SOB. Every sprinter is a cocky SOB. That's how it works. Obviously in a sport where the cameras can't catch everything Cavendish's antics in the group have finally struck a nerve with enough people and his colleagues are reacting.
Like I said, I think the crash was just as much Haussler's fault as Cav's. I think crashes like this happen all the time in bunch sprints. The crash was simply the event the group needed to make a public statement. When it comes to sprinters I'm not sure if it matters if people like them or not. I'm inclined to think it doesn't. They all fight for position in the sprint anyway and nobody other than teammates are politely giving them room. The Tour will be telling...
Friday, June 04, 2010
Sorry, Not a Perfect Game
By now you've certainly seen this highlight and heard the story. Two days later I'm going to weigh in on a part of the story that I think is now a bigger story than the blown call. People everywhere are calling for Bud Selig, Commissioner of MLB, to officially change the call and award Armando Gallaraga the perfect game. Jennifer Granholm, Governor of Michigan, has officially issued him a perfect game, whatever that's worth. Selig isn't doing so, and I think it's the right call.
It doesn't take more than one look at the video to clearly see that the guy was out and Jim Joyce missed it. In any game the officiating crew has a small window of opportunity to huddle up and collectively change a call. When they didn't do that, it was too late, the perfect game was done. You can't go back, retroactively and award this kid the perfect game. If you had instant replay Jim Leland could have tossed a red flag instead of his hat and maybe something could be done, but we don't, so it wasn't.
When I saw the video for the first time I was totally blown away that Joyce missed such an easy call. For someone who spent most of his life playing baseball the thing that shocked me was that the unspoken rules didn't automatically kick in for Joyce. What are some unspoken rules? For one, a tag almost never actually as to be made in a non-force out situation. The umps obviously need you to swipe at the guy but if the ball beat the guy and the tag accidentally misses a body part, 99.9% of the time, you're still out. Ever noticed how first basemen always seem to be moving forward be the time the ball gets to them? If you watched hours of film you'd find that the first baseman is hardly ever still touching the base when he actually catches the ball. Tagging up on a fly ball? It's almost impossible to watch both the ball and the runner. So as long as you aren't obviously way too early, nobody's going to say anything. These are the kinds of things that are simply accepted in baseball. So when there's a tough ground ball for the last out of a potential perfect game and the first baseman busts his ass to get there and the pitcher busts his ass to cover first and the play is even remotely close (which this wasn't) you call the guy out. No one from the other team is going to come out and argue with you that their guy was safe and screw up the celebration of a perfect game by the other team. It's baseball after all. It's a gentleman's sport and their are gentlemanly understandings that just accepted.
So why can't the call be reversed and the perfect game be awarded retroactively? Because like them or hate them, the umpires hold the game together. There's a reason that close calls aren't made a best two out of three rock, paper, scissor show down at home plate. As a kid growing up you hate the umpires because at any level below professional baseball, they aren't very good. But as I've gotten older I've come to realize just how good the professional guys are at their jobs. I'm amazed by how many close calls that with 30 views of playback show that the ump on the field only needed to see it once in real time. That's amazing. Do they get every single call right? Obviously not. But the umpires are an integral part of the game and their job is 98% objective, 2% subjective and that's just the way it is. You're asking a human being to see something happening at a speed that most of us can't relate to and within less than a second make a decision on what they've just witnessed. Occasionally, the subjective nature takes over and they blow one. Unless you want cameras suspended from all different angles and a guy in the press box controlling the cameras and making the call, an occasional blown call, be it big or small, is what you'll get when your officials are people. Say you do go back and change the call giving the guy a perfect game, what happens to the next at bat? Does it get erased and we pretend like it never happened? Does some take an eraser to Gallaraga's pitch count? These are small things, but in baseball, they matter.
Gallaraga seems to be handling the whole thing with a lot of class. Even as the call was made he just sort of smirked. Me, I'd have been nose to nose with the guy in seconds. Gallaraga handled it correctly. The Tigers celebrated in the clubhouse after the game and treated Gallaraga as if he had just tossed a perfect game, not a 1 hitter. I think that might mean more for that organization and that young man than if he would have thrown the perfect game. When your teammates want to celebrate your accomplishment even though it didn't actually happen, that means something!
To be honest, I'd never heard of this kid before this story. And the controversy over this call has thrust him into the limelight more than if the call had been made correctly. Not that the time GMA spends talking about it really matters, but it does, in a way. In today's baseball record books there are cases where people want to see astrix put beside a guys name and there are accomplishments made that some people who probably rather not be remembered for. I think this is a situation where he'll be remembered for something he won't get credit for doing. I guarantee at the end of the season Gallaraga's 1 hitter will be mentioned in the same breath as the A's pitcher's (already forgot his name) perfect game. It's basically a technicality, but in baseball, there are plenty of those.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Why Lance Armstrong Should Not Get Busted
I want to write about anything else, I really do! But the only thing swirling through my head is Floyd telling the truth and tossing everyone else under the bus and by everyone, I mean Lance Armstrong.
I've always said, and I believe I said it earlier this week, that it's easy for all us who have never had to make the choice to dope and compete in Europe or be "moral" and race crits back in America, to wag our fingers and take a holier-than-thou stance against athletes who confess or are caught doping. I've often argued that if everyone else is doping and cycling is your best prospect for increasing your quality of life, it's a poor economic decision not to dope. I've never argued that it makes it morally better because everyone else is doing it, but, in a case like this, the morality of doping is a gray area.
For issues like this I often like to turn to the opinions of pros. What do they think about Floyd and if Lance doped, etc, etc? Yesterday I posted on twitter a link to a blog entry by Adam Myerson who I think has an insightful take on the entire issue. You can find it here. Maybe I like his take because it matches pretty well with what I already think, but, I still think a pros opinion should carry a bit more weight than the guy who beats up on you at your local Tuesday night ride who's been a Cat 3 for the last 10 years and refuses to upgrade because he knows he can't compete at the next level. Man, that's a tangent.
Back to the issue at hand. There is now a full on federal investigation into whether Lance Armstrong used performance enhancing drugs during his career. First off, let's just all take a moment to reflect on what's going on in the world today, this instant:
(In no order of importance)
1) Oil Spill with little to nothing being done about it.
2) Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that cost ga-billions a day and don't need to be fought.
3) Schools all over the country and firing teachers and closing doors because of budget short falls.
4) Economy still in the shitter.
Now, I realize that a federal investigation of Lance Armstrong doesn't cost so much that it would have any affect on the issues listed if the money were spent in those areas instead. But, one can't help but wonder why the hell the US Gov't gives a shit if Lance Armstrong used drugs or not. I had the same argument about their investigations into baseball and football and I think the same reigns true now. If they want federal investigations, fine, but do it on some topic that actually makes a difference. In reality, whether Lance was doped up or not doesn't change anything about the world in a positive way. If you're going to take away his tour titles, a lot of years you're going to rolling that title down to the 4th placed rider before you get to someone not busted for doping. Is Lance going to write a check to Andre Kivilev (Finished 4th behind Ulrich and Beloki) for the 2001 Tour de France if he's found guilty? If so, that same investigation better go find out if Kivilev was doping because chances are high he was and so on down the line. It may change the outcomes on paper of who won 7 straight bike races in France. Big F'in Deal!
For the longest time I've had the internal debate over whether Lance used drugs because I feel like he did but I want to believe he didn't. While some people don't think that Floyd's statements are credible because he lied for so long, I'm not sure I agree. Floyd's got nothing to gain by naming names. Nobody's paying him to do so. Maybe he gets a reduced punishment for lying under oath or some shit but I'm not sure that's reason enough name all these names. If he had just kept his mouth shut he wouldn't have to face that charge to begin with. I think Floyd was simply tired of being the guy taking the fall for everyone else. This sentiment is backed up by Myerson's comments.
Do I think Lance Armstrong used drugs? Yes. There I said it. I know I have no evidence that could prove anything in court. I'm just a guy who rides a bike and writes an opinionated blog about various crap. I have a ton of reasons to believe he was and I think he's just smarter than everybody else. I think Lance's inner circle is better paid and more loyal than any of the guys he beat in the Tours that got busted. Lance didn't work with a doctor who was going to put his name in some easily deciphered code in his balance sheet. You know why king pins of drug rings hardly ever get busted? Because they're so far removed from the product the guys at the ground level don't even know who they're working for. Lance isn't stupid. I'm sure he and Johan set up their circle the same way. Whoever was supplying the dope probably thought it was for some junior in Bulgaria trying to get to the next level. Everybody's got a price and if there's one person in cycling who can afford to meet someone's price, well, that answer's obvious.
Do I think Lance Armstrong should get busted? No. I know, that's a contradiction, but remember, I don't personally get into the whole morality issue of doping. Some people don't like Lance Armstrong. Those some people are a tiny tiny minority of the people who travel across the globe to stand in a crowd 20 deep to take a picture of the guy at an event they had never heard of before. You know why? Because they've got/beat cancer and this guy is their inspiration. Is that a reason to not get busted for doping? Maybe not to some people, but to me it is. Worlds will literally crumble for people fighting that disease if their hero is exposed as a fraud. I'm not making this up. It's not hard to find accounts of people battling cancer who say they'd never had made if it weren't for such an inspiring figure as Lance Armstrong. There is plenty of science that backs up the claims of having a positive outlook or a reason to live as a helpful factor in beating deadly cancers. If Lance doped his way to 7 Tour de France victories and millions of millions of dollars, does that infraction negate the insane amount of money he's able to raise for cancer research? You think if Lance Armstrong didn't win 7 Tours de France he'd be able to sit down with Senators, Congressmen and other leaders to talk about legislation and funding for cancer? Absolutely not. I obviously can't prove this but my assumption would be donations, funding, meetings and support that is currently driven by the Lance Armstrong Foundation would all but dry up upon a conviction or confession of using drugs.
When Floyd confessed nobody's life was altered. The people who donated to his fund certainly had every right to be outraged but if you had the excess cash to donate to that anyway I imagine you're still doing alright. I doubt anybody would even call it a setback once discovered you donated to a scam. If Lance confesses, critical money being used to fund cancer research could go away. In the grand scheme of things that could definitely mean a set back in someone's life battling the disease. It could mean they die.
I don't care if Lance Armstrong used drugs. But I like cycling and the history of the sport in a totally different way than most fans. Most people that are Lance fans aren't cycling fans. They don't care or haven't even heard of Paris-Roubaix, the Tour of Flanders or any other race that Lance didn't win 7 times. Most of them don't even understand how the Tour de France works. But they love Lance Armstrong and that's all they need to know. Maybe Lance built a really elaborate house of cards. And for no reasons besides those I mentioned, I hope beyond hope that he used super glue.
I've always said, and I believe I said it earlier this week, that it's easy for all us who have never had to make the choice to dope and compete in Europe or be "moral" and race crits back in America, to wag our fingers and take a holier-than-thou stance against athletes who confess or are caught doping. I've often argued that if everyone else is doping and cycling is your best prospect for increasing your quality of life, it's a poor economic decision not to dope. I've never argued that it makes it morally better because everyone else is doing it, but, in a case like this, the morality of doping is a gray area.
For issues like this I often like to turn to the opinions of pros. What do they think about Floyd and if Lance doped, etc, etc? Yesterday I posted on twitter a link to a blog entry by Adam Myerson who I think has an insightful take on the entire issue. You can find it here. Maybe I like his take because it matches pretty well with what I already think, but, I still think a pros opinion should carry a bit more weight than the guy who beats up on you at your local Tuesday night ride who's been a Cat 3 for the last 10 years and refuses to upgrade because he knows he can't compete at the next level. Man, that's a tangent.
Back to the issue at hand. There is now a full on federal investigation into whether Lance Armstrong used performance enhancing drugs during his career. First off, let's just all take a moment to reflect on what's going on in the world today, this instant:
(In no order of importance)
1) Oil Spill with little to nothing being done about it.
2) Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that cost ga-billions a day and don't need to be fought.
3) Schools all over the country and firing teachers and closing doors because of budget short falls.
4) Economy still in the shitter.
Now, I realize that a federal investigation of Lance Armstrong doesn't cost so much that it would have any affect on the issues listed if the money were spent in those areas instead. But, one can't help but wonder why the hell the US Gov't gives a shit if Lance Armstrong used drugs or not. I had the same argument about their investigations into baseball and football and I think the same reigns true now. If they want federal investigations, fine, but do it on some topic that actually makes a difference. In reality, whether Lance was doped up or not doesn't change anything about the world in a positive way. If you're going to take away his tour titles, a lot of years you're going to rolling that title down to the 4th placed rider before you get to someone not busted for doping. Is Lance going to write a check to Andre Kivilev (Finished 4th behind Ulrich and Beloki) for the 2001 Tour de France if he's found guilty? If so, that same investigation better go find out if Kivilev was doping because chances are high he was and so on down the line. It may change the outcomes on paper of who won 7 straight bike races in France. Big F'in Deal!
For the longest time I've had the internal debate over whether Lance used drugs because I feel like he did but I want to believe he didn't. While some people don't think that Floyd's statements are credible because he lied for so long, I'm not sure I agree. Floyd's got nothing to gain by naming names. Nobody's paying him to do so. Maybe he gets a reduced punishment for lying under oath or some shit but I'm not sure that's reason enough name all these names. If he had just kept his mouth shut he wouldn't have to face that charge to begin with. I think Floyd was simply tired of being the guy taking the fall for everyone else. This sentiment is backed up by Myerson's comments.
Do I think Lance Armstrong used drugs? Yes. There I said it. I know I have no evidence that could prove anything in court. I'm just a guy who rides a bike and writes an opinionated blog about various crap. I have a ton of reasons to believe he was and I think he's just smarter than everybody else. I think Lance's inner circle is better paid and more loyal than any of the guys he beat in the Tours that got busted. Lance didn't work with a doctor who was going to put his name in some easily deciphered code in his balance sheet. You know why king pins of drug rings hardly ever get busted? Because they're so far removed from the product the guys at the ground level don't even know who they're working for. Lance isn't stupid. I'm sure he and Johan set up their circle the same way. Whoever was supplying the dope probably thought it was for some junior in Bulgaria trying to get to the next level. Everybody's got a price and if there's one person in cycling who can afford to meet someone's price, well, that answer's obvious.
Do I think Lance Armstrong should get busted? No. I know, that's a contradiction, but remember, I don't personally get into the whole morality issue of doping. Some people don't like Lance Armstrong. Those some people are a tiny tiny minority of the people who travel across the globe to stand in a crowd 20 deep to take a picture of the guy at an event they had never heard of before. You know why? Because they've got/beat cancer and this guy is their inspiration. Is that a reason to not get busted for doping? Maybe not to some people, but to me it is. Worlds will literally crumble for people fighting that disease if their hero is exposed as a fraud. I'm not making this up. It's not hard to find accounts of people battling cancer who say they'd never had made if it weren't for such an inspiring figure as Lance Armstrong. There is plenty of science that backs up the claims of having a positive outlook or a reason to live as a helpful factor in beating deadly cancers. If Lance doped his way to 7 Tour de France victories and millions of millions of dollars, does that infraction negate the insane amount of money he's able to raise for cancer research? You think if Lance Armstrong didn't win 7 Tours de France he'd be able to sit down with Senators, Congressmen and other leaders to talk about legislation and funding for cancer? Absolutely not. I obviously can't prove this but my assumption would be donations, funding, meetings and support that is currently driven by the Lance Armstrong Foundation would all but dry up upon a conviction or confession of using drugs.
When Floyd confessed nobody's life was altered. The people who donated to his fund certainly had every right to be outraged but if you had the excess cash to donate to that anyway I imagine you're still doing alright. I doubt anybody would even call it a setback once discovered you donated to a scam. If Lance confesses, critical money being used to fund cancer research could go away. In the grand scheme of things that could definitely mean a set back in someone's life battling the disease. It could mean they die.
I don't care if Lance Armstrong used drugs. But I like cycling and the history of the sport in a totally different way than most fans. Most people that are Lance fans aren't cycling fans. They don't care or haven't even heard of Paris-Roubaix, the Tour of Flanders or any other race that Lance didn't win 7 times. Most of them don't even understand how the Tour de France works. But they love Lance Armstrong and that's all they need to know. Maybe Lance built a really elaborate house of cards. And for no reasons besides those I mentioned, I hope beyond hope that he used super glue.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Chris Horner Vs. Michael from Biggest Loser
The managing editor here at TeamLandall is sometimes known to be a bit indecisive. Especially when it comes to topics to write about. Well, maybe not especially since it's well known we basically write about cycling, but, mostly when there are multiple topics of interest and one or so happen to be about something other than bikes. When this happens we generally decide to cover both. Or, however many there may be.
First up, cycling.
The Tour of California wrapped up on Sunday and much like I predicted Levi wasn't standing on the top step this year. My favorite quote came from Dave Zabriskie, "I'm sick of finishing second in this race." Yeah, no kidding. But, I think there are much more important things to be taken away from the Tour of California than just the overall GC.
First off, the biggest DNF of the race, Lance Armstrong. I know he crashed and got stitches in his face and I'm not about to question a guy's toughness. But regardless of the fact that Lance didn't finish there is one thing that's pretty clear, Lance Armstrong is not going to be anywhere near the top step of this year's Tour de France. For all my Contador-hating-Lance-loving friends out there, it's time that everybody just prepare themselves for a good old fashioned whipping in the both the high mountains and the TTs and probably behind a wood shed if available. Will Lance embarrass himself at the Tour de France? Absolutely not. Will he even be a factor? Only if you measure factor in media attention and crowd clapping.
So, if I'm right, and I think I am, this brings a whole new question to the table for the higher ups at Team RadioShack. Who should be the team leader at the Tour de France? For me, this answer is easy and obvious, Chris Horner. Take a look at the RadioShack team and tell me who was won a stage race that drew real talent? Let me help before you start googling, it's Chris Horner. Levi's only win is at the Gila and while I think it's a great race and great that bigger squads are sending guys; while Levi was beating up on Fly V Australia, Chris Horner was beating up on Alejandro Valverde. No disrespect to Fly V, but I would be surprised if Alejandro Valverdo has heard of them. Can Chris Horner beat Alberto Contador? I don't know, probably not. But he's certainly got a better shot and can be on much better form in July than Lance has shown all year. I think Horner has proved himself to be worthy of the leader role on that team. He worked his butt off for Levi in California because he's a great teammate, but as a domestique and finishing only 1:09 off the lead, one has to wonder what might have been had the reigns been turned loose. I think Lance and Levi should do the same for him in France. He's easily their best shot at being on the podium.
Also, from a racing tactics stand point, the only way anybody is going to beat Contador is to isolate him and make him chase down on his own early and often into the climbs. If RadioShack has three guys who can continually counter attack when Contador covers the move, I think eventually they can whittle him down. That is unless Contador just gets sick of that game goes on the attack himself and buries everyone. I sort of feel like my strategy is the equivalent of poking a bear with a stick, but maybe they can get a big stick?
Up next, not cycling. The Biggest Loser.
I watch this show every Tuesday night and cry like a baby. It's ridiculous. I think it's actually embarrassing for Jill. Something about people who have finally hit that bottom and are willing to do whatever it takes to make themselves better is awesome to me. People working hard to make themselves better is just inspiring, period. Being that I'm 6'3" and weigh 153lbs I don't really have a lot in common with the people on this show. At the beginning of every season I sit there and wonder how they've let themselves get that way. The funny thing is, in their interviews, they all ask themselves the same question. They never have an answer, they just know that now, they're sick of it, and they're ready to do what it takes to change their lives. And you know what? They do.
Last night was the results show and the winner, Mike, lost over 50% of his original body weight in less than 6 months. He didn't have surgery, he worked his tail off, quite literally. When he was sore, he worked out. When he was hungry, he ate correctly. I know being in an environment like they have on the ranch would really help to jump start anybody's weight loss and not everybody has access to those facilities or super star personal trainers. But what everybody does have access to is the outdoors. You don't need a gym to get healthy. You just need will power.
The obesity rates in this country are ridiculous. Just take a look around you on any given street and see how many people you'd categorize as healthy. Not fit. Not about to run a marathon, but just healthy. Not that many. I wish it was absolutely mandatory for obese people to watch this show. To see that it can be done. The show does a great job of showing how hard the contestants are working out, but also how hard their journey is outside of a gym as well. Like I said, I can't really relate, but I bet most people could, and they could be inspired even more than I am. But, the one thing I think I take away from every season is that the decision to work that hard comes from within. You see the people that get to the ranch and then don't make it very long because it's too hard. But you also see the people who are serious about changing their lives.
For a visual, here's the before and after picture of this season's winner.
After seeing these kinds of transformations it's tough for me to listen to people make excuses about how it hurts when they work out because of this or because of that. This guy, O'Neal, could barely walk his knees were so bad. Not too bad for a guy who wanted something bad enough to deal with the pain. After more time than anyone should spend searching for a before after picture that would load I have given up, go here to see what I mean.
First up, cycling.
The Tour of California wrapped up on Sunday and much like I predicted Levi wasn't standing on the top step this year. My favorite quote came from Dave Zabriskie, "I'm sick of finishing second in this race." Yeah, no kidding. But, I think there are much more important things to be taken away from the Tour of California than just the overall GC.
First off, the biggest DNF of the race, Lance Armstrong. I know he crashed and got stitches in his face and I'm not about to question a guy's toughness. But regardless of the fact that Lance didn't finish there is one thing that's pretty clear, Lance Armstrong is not going to be anywhere near the top step of this year's Tour de France. For all my Contador-hating-Lance-loving friends out there, it's time that everybody just prepare themselves for a good old fashioned whipping in the both the high mountains and the TTs and probably behind a wood shed if available. Will Lance embarrass himself at the Tour de France? Absolutely not. Will he even be a factor? Only if you measure factor in media attention and crowd clapping.
So, if I'm right, and I think I am, this brings a whole new question to the table for the higher ups at Team RadioShack. Who should be the team leader at the Tour de France? For me, this answer is easy and obvious, Chris Horner. Take a look at the RadioShack team and tell me who was won a stage race that drew real talent? Let me help before you start googling, it's Chris Horner. Levi's only win is at the Gila and while I think it's a great race and great that bigger squads are sending guys; while Levi was beating up on Fly V Australia, Chris Horner was beating up on Alejandro Valverde. No disrespect to Fly V, but I would be surprised if Alejandro Valverdo has heard of them. Can Chris Horner beat Alberto Contador? I don't know, probably not. But he's certainly got a better shot and can be on much better form in July than Lance has shown all year. I think Horner has proved himself to be worthy of the leader role on that team. He worked his butt off for Levi in California because he's a great teammate, but as a domestique and finishing only 1:09 off the lead, one has to wonder what might have been had the reigns been turned loose. I think Lance and Levi should do the same for him in France. He's easily their best shot at being on the podium.
Also, from a racing tactics stand point, the only way anybody is going to beat Contador is to isolate him and make him chase down on his own early and often into the climbs. If RadioShack has three guys who can continually counter attack when Contador covers the move, I think eventually they can whittle him down. That is unless Contador just gets sick of that game goes on the attack himself and buries everyone. I sort of feel like my strategy is the equivalent of poking a bear with a stick, but maybe they can get a big stick?
Up next, not cycling. The Biggest Loser.
I watch this show every Tuesday night and cry like a baby. It's ridiculous. I think it's actually embarrassing for Jill. Something about people who have finally hit that bottom and are willing to do whatever it takes to make themselves better is awesome to me. People working hard to make themselves better is just inspiring, period. Being that I'm 6'3" and weigh 153lbs I don't really have a lot in common with the people on this show. At the beginning of every season I sit there and wonder how they've let themselves get that way. The funny thing is, in their interviews, they all ask themselves the same question. They never have an answer, they just know that now, they're sick of it, and they're ready to do what it takes to change their lives. And you know what? They do.
Last night was the results show and the winner, Mike, lost over 50% of his original body weight in less than 6 months. He didn't have surgery, he worked his tail off, quite literally. When he was sore, he worked out. When he was hungry, he ate correctly. I know being in an environment like they have on the ranch would really help to jump start anybody's weight loss and not everybody has access to those facilities or super star personal trainers. But what everybody does have access to is the outdoors. You don't need a gym to get healthy. You just need will power.
The obesity rates in this country are ridiculous. Just take a look around you on any given street and see how many people you'd categorize as healthy. Not fit. Not about to run a marathon, but just healthy. Not that many. I wish it was absolutely mandatory for obese people to watch this show. To see that it can be done. The show does a great job of showing how hard the contestants are working out, but also how hard their journey is outside of a gym as well. Like I said, I can't really relate, but I bet most people could, and they could be inspired even more than I am. But, the one thing I think I take away from every season is that the decision to work that hard comes from within. You see the people that get to the ranch and then don't make it very long because it's too hard. But you also see the people who are serious about changing their lives.
For a visual, here's the before and after picture of this season's winner.
After seeing these kinds of transformations it's tough for me to listen to people make excuses about how it hurts when they work out because of this or because of that. This guy, O'Neal, could barely walk his knees were so bad. Not too bad for a guy who wanted something bad enough to deal with the pain. After more time than anyone should spend searching for a before after picture that would load I have given up, go here to see what I mean.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Floyd Doped. Get Over It.
If you're a fan of cycling and didn't crawl into a cave sometime between Wednesday night and today you are well aware that my boy, Floyd Landis, confessed to doping. If you're a fan of cycling you probably go to all the same websites that I do and so you've read about a hump-teen-ga-jillion articles on the topic. Being that this blog talks mostly about cycling I guess I feel (even though that's weird) some sort of obligation to at least express my thoughts on the ordeal.
I read the story Wednesday night from VeloNews on my iPhone. When I woke up the next morning there were about 15 emails that had already started circulating on the cycling team's list serve. Everyone was calling Floyd Landis an asshole. A friend who I used to ride with in San Francisco sent out an email to his riding buddies calling Floyd a huge asshole. Everyone but me, it seemed, had this knee jerk reaction to this news to the point that they thought they needed to share it. I found this odd. Just weeks ago there was a story on the news where a teacher beat a student and they have it on video. Nobody sent me an email calling this teacher an asshole. But Floyd Landis' drug confession warrants outrage...
I get why people are upset. Floyd put on a charade since the positive result came back. In actuality I think he did everything he should have done to try and over turn the case. He's not the first cyclist to question the validity of the test used or the ethical practice of the lab doing the testing. There's another pretty famous cyclist who has done this on several occasions and seems to walk away from it each time with his star power tripled. The one thing I do think that Floyd did absolutely wrong was establishing the Fairness Fund or whatever he called it. Basically Floyd went bankrupt and couldn't afford to pay his legal bills. So, he set up a fund where people who believed him could pitch in. It was all very "for the good of cycling." What it turned out to be was a sham and it's a shame he took his fan's money and squandered it away when he knew the truth all along. That aspect of this entire case I think justifies calling Floyd an asshole. But the doping? I'm not sure.
As a cyclist with a lot of non cycling friends, I always get asked the question, "Do you think Lance doped?" That is probably the single hardest question to answer in all of cycling. Legally, the answer is no. He's never been busted, he didn't do it. Logically, it seems almost impossible that he didn't. I was asked that very question this weekend and again I had to dance around the topic so that I don't crush the image of someone's favorite cyclist but I feel like there's a truth that people, especially Americans, just need to realize about that era, and more importantly, the history of cycling. It was, and maybe still is, a culture of cheating.
Lance is one of those guys who loves the science of what he does. I think that's one reason he's been so successful. When other guys thought TT bikes looked funny he was investing in wind tunnel testing to get as aerodynamic as possible. When other guys were eating chocolate in the off season (Jan Ulrich) he was taking advantage of testing things like his VO2Max and using a power meter to establish baselines for measurable results and projections of fitness. Because of this, it was often thought that Lance Armstrong was a freak of a human being recording numbers so high and off the charts that nobody else had anything of this level. Truth be told, everybody who rides in the professional peloton has V02Max numbers at least in the range of Lance, and he's certainly not the owner of the highest (That's some cross country skier from one of the Scandinavian countries). I remember reading a few years ago that our boy Floyd Landis had higher numbers than Lance and it's long been known that Tom Danielson (or Jan Ulrich) is the most "gifted" cyclist from a pure scientific stance. But, as they say, that's why they don't play the games on paper.
What's this have to do with Floyd doping and accusing Lance of doing the same? Bill Strickland pointed out on his blog, Sitting In, that of the 7 tours that Lance won 14 other podium spots up for grabs. 8 of those 14 podium spots were held by the same riders and 5 of those 8 have admitted to doping or were suspended for it. If Lance was surrounded by guys that were doping (not to mention the domestiques that left US Postal or Discovery to be busted later, ie., Roberto Heras, Tyler Hamilton and Floyd), and they're all pretty equal on paper, how'd he beat them so consistently? I know that question looks like I'm throwing Lance under the bus and I really don't mean to. Again, legally, Lance is clean and innocent because he's never tested positive. Maybe he beat them because he was willing to hurt more than they were. Maybe he beat them because he's just flat out better at racing his bike. Maybe he beat them because it meant more to him than it did to them. Maybe he beat them because instead of eating chocolate in the winter he was training. Those are all factors that would certainly make a difference in a 3 week bike race.
I have a tough time, except for the Fairness Fund, of telling all my friends how much of an asshole I think Floyd is. I defended him to just about every person who I've rode a bike with because I like/d Floyd and I really wanted to believe he won the Tour de France. I made up all sorts of excuses and debate points based on science I didn't and don't understand all in the name of trying to convince one more person to side with Floyd. Still, knowing now that it was all a waste of time, I can't say that I blame him. I've said it over and over again that it's easy to point the finger at these guys when they get busted and scold them and say "how could you?" But until you've had someone come to you and say "If this is how you want to make your living, this is what you have to do," I'm not sure you're in any place to be upset that Floyd chose to dope. If Floyd is telling the truth and all those other guys were on the juice as well, he has to feel betrayed that he got busted and nobody else did. At this point, I'm sure he looks at himself in the mirror and says something like, "Fine. I did it. But I'm not going down a lone." Isn't that what happens to drug dealers and the mafia? Eventually one person can't take it anymore and simply isn't willing to be the only one doing time for doing what everybody else was doing?
Floyd doped. Get over it. Did Lance and the other's named? Who knows. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. But, in my humble opinion a cyclist doping isn't nearly a big enough deal for everyone to send out mass emails as if they've been personally assaulted by the guy.
Just for fun I responded to my friend's email using "reply all," which I generally despise. I wrote, "He's no Richard Virenque, but he's doing ok for himself." I'm not sure if a single person on that email list even knows who Richard Virenque is, but if not, hopefully they looked it up and found a story of a guy who somehow managed to dope his entire career and seemingly by ignoring the charges, won more polka dot jersey's than anyone in the history of the Tour. Mr. Virenque is French and to the French dopings not a serious crime. It's just part of the sport. It creates drama and that's what the French love about cycling, the drama. How's the saying go, "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying?" Maybe that's just how it goes in cycling.
I read the story Wednesday night from VeloNews on my iPhone. When I woke up the next morning there were about 15 emails that had already started circulating on the cycling team's list serve. Everyone was calling Floyd Landis an asshole. A friend who I used to ride with in San Francisco sent out an email to his riding buddies calling Floyd a huge asshole. Everyone but me, it seemed, had this knee jerk reaction to this news to the point that they thought they needed to share it. I found this odd. Just weeks ago there was a story on the news where a teacher beat a student and they have it on video. Nobody sent me an email calling this teacher an asshole. But Floyd Landis' drug confession warrants outrage...
I get why people are upset. Floyd put on a charade since the positive result came back. In actuality I think he did everything he should have done to try and over turn the case. He's not the first cyclist to question the validity of the test used or the ethical practice of the lab doing the testing. There's another pretty famous cyclist who has done this on several occasions and seems to walk away from it each time with his star power tripled. The one thing I do think that Floyd did absolutely wrong was establishing the Fairness Fund or whatever he called it. Basically Floyd went bankrupt and couldn't afford to pay his legal bills. So, he set up a fund where people who believed him could pitch in. It was all very "for the good of cycling." What it turned out to be was a sham and it's a shame he took his fan's money and squandered it away when he knew the truth all along. That aspect of this entire case I think justifies calling Floyd an asshole. But the doping? I'm not sure.
As a cyclist with a lot of non cycling friends, I always get asked the question, "Do you think Lance doped?" That is probably the single hardest question to answer in all of cycling. Legally, the answer is no. He's never been busted, he didn't do it. Logically, it seems almost impossible that he didn't. I was asked that very question this weekend and again I had to dance around the topic so that I don't crush the image of someone's favorite cyclist but I feel like there's a truth that people, especially Americans, just need to realize about that era, and more importantly, the history of cycling. It was, and maybe still is, a culture of cheating.
Lance is one of those guys who loves the science of what he does. I think that's one reason he's been so successful. When other guys thought TT bikes looked funny he was investing in wind tunnel testing to get as aerodynamic as possible. When other guys were eating chocolate in the off season (Jan Ulrich) he was taking advantage of testing things like his VO2Max and using a power meter to establish baselines for measurable results and projections of fitness. Because of this, it was often thought that Lance Armstrong was a freak of a human being recording numbers so high and off the charts that nobody else had anything of this level. Truth be told, everybody who rides in the professional peloton has V02Max numbers at least in the range of Lance, and he's certainly not the owner of the highest (That's some cross country skier from one of the Scandinavian countries). I remember reading a few years ago that our boy Floyd Landis had higher numbers than Lance and it's long been known that Tom Danielson (or Jan Ulrich) is the most "gifted" cyclist from a pure scientific stance. But, as they say, that's why they don't play the games on paper.
What's this have to do with Floyd doping and accusing Lance of doing the same? Bill Strickland pointed out on his blog, Sitting In, that of the 7 tours that Lance won 14 other podium spots up for grabs. 8 of those 14 podium spots were held by the same riders and 5 of those 8 have admitted to doping or were suspended for it. If Lance was surrounded by guys that were doping (not to mention the domestiques that left US Postal or Discovery to be busted later, ie., Roberto Heras, Tyler Hamilton and Floyd), and they're all pretty equal on paper, how'd he beat them so consistently? I know that question looks like I'm throwing Lance under the bus and I really don't mean to. Again, legally, Lance is clean and innocent because he's never tested positive. Maybe he beat them because he was willing to hurt more than they were. Maybe he beat them because he's just flat out better at racing his bike. Maybe he beat them because it meant more to him than it did to them. Maybe he beat them because instead of eating chocolate in the winter he was training. Those are all factors that would certainly make a difference in a 3 week bike race.
I have a tough time, except for the Fairness Fund, of telling all my friends how much of an asshole I think Floyd is. I defended him to just about every person who I've rode a bike with because I like/d Floyd and I really wanted to believe he won the Tour de France. I made up all sorts of excuses and debate points based on science I didn't and don't understand all in the name of trying to convince one more person to side with Floyd. Still, knowing now that it was all a waste of time, I can't say that I blame him. I've said it over and over again that it's easy to point the finger at these guys when they get busted and scold them and say "how could you?" But until you've had someone come to you and say "If this is how you want to make your living, this is what you have to do," I'm not sure you're in any place to be upset that Floyd chose to dope. If Floyd is telling the truth and all those other guys were on the juice as well, he has to feel betrayed that he got busted and nobody else did. At this point, I'm sure he looks at himself in the mirror and says something like, "Fine. I did it. But I'm not going down a lone." Isn't that what happens to drug dealers and the mafia? Eventually one person can't take it anymore and simply isn't willing to be the only one doing time for doing what everybody else was doing?
Floyd doped. Get over it. Did Lance and the other's named? Who knows. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. But, in my humble opinion a cyclist doping isn't nearly a big enough deal for everyone to send out mass emails as if they've been personally assaulted by the guy.
Just for fun I responded to my friend's email using "reply all," which I generally despise. I wrote, "He's no Richard Virenque, but he's doing ok for himself." I'm not sure if a single person on that email list even knows who Richard Virenque is, but if not, hopefully they looked it up and found a story of a guy who somehow managed to dope his entire career and seemingly by ignoring the charges, won more polka dot jersey's than anyone in the history of the Tour. Mr. Virenque is French and to the French dopings not a serious crime. It's just part of the sport. It creates drama and that's what the French love about cycling, the drama. How's the saying go, "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying?" Maybe that's just how it goes in cycling.
Monday, May 24, 2010
A Trip To Detroit
I've been lucky enough to convince a great girl from Michigan to love me. For any of you that know me, you know my undying love for the great state of Texas. Well, take my love of Texas and multiply that by some coefficient that represents actual knowledge of why they love something and you get how much Jill loves Michigan. This past weekend we drove to Michigan for a few family festivities and decided to turn it into a little mini-vacation since we haven't been on one in a quite a while. A vacation to Detroit you might ask? That's right, and here's roughly how we spent one of the most fun Saturday evening/nights I've had in a long time!
Detroit has three casinos, the MGM Grand, Greek Town and Motor City. The MGM Grand could easily be in Vegas. It's that nice! Greek Town and Motor City are both really nice as well, but not laid out in your typical giant gaming floor casino style. Both are in renovated buildings. Motor City is in the old Wonder Bread plant which is really cool and Greek Town is in something old as well. Brian, like Jill, loves Michigan, but especially Detroit so he gladly took on the role of tour guide and took us all over Detroit Saturday night once our casino hoping was done.
Detroit is an awesome city. I know that most people will read that and laugh because all you hear about Detroit is how dangerous it is, how there are no jobs and a plethora of other things you wouldn't necessarily associate with a city being described as "awesome." But, I've been to the city twice now, the other time was in the winter, and my opinion was only confirmed more on this trip. I like cities that have character. Cities that when they were built took the time to make their buildings beautiful. Most people when they think of the buildings of Detroit they think of abandoned factories and burned out neighborhoods. But there is some seriously amazing architectural details in Detroit. And not just the biggest buildings that make up the skyline as you're coming in. Pretty much 1 out of 3 buildings, regardless of size or stature in downtown Detroit has really extensive and beautiful details. They didn't just build a bunch of rectangles that shoot to the sky. They built character and that character, whether people chose to look past it or not, is still there today.
We ate dinner at this little place called Small Plates. It was like a tapas restaurant but not Spanish. We all ordered a bunch of stuff and shared. It wasn't the best meal I've ever had in my life but it was good. And, like every meal you buy in downtown Detroit, you're helping a place that obviously needs it. It was nice to support local Detroit business owners instead of eating at a Friday's out in the suburbs.
After dinner we went to Astoria in Greektown for assorted pasties of awesomeness. The place was so packed it took at least 10 minutes just to get your order taken. Not only were the deserts some of the best I've ever had, Astoria is full of character and charm. When people think Detroit, they certainly don't think places like this exist and that's a shame, because it's awesome. The Baklava I ate literally caused an "oh my god" verbal reaction while my mouth was still full from the bite.
Did you know that Detroit is the home to the only urban state park in all of Michigan? Yeah, neither does anybody else because the place was deserted. When we parked I was a bit nervous because it was already dark and we were on the riverside of an abandoned factory or warehouse. But, we were troopers and found a picnic table to eat our treats. I know I keep going on and on about how great it is, but this park was really pretty. It's waterfront location, the Renaissance Center and the rest of the skyline was right there. The Windsor skyline was just across the river. There's a lighthouse. It's quite and peaceful. It's a great park hidden right there in a city where people think the only green spaces exist after a block's been leveled and the grass has started growing back again.
Cliff Bell's as you can see from the menu was established in 1935. I don't want to pretend like I know all the details of their story but I can say, from my experience, this place is awesome! It went under for a while and then somebody bought it and restored it. They didn't renovate, they refurbished, which I think is really cool and only adds to the unique charm. It's a blues/jazz bar. While we were there a 92 year old lady who recorded her first blues album in the 1930s sang with the band. I'm not the biggest live music fan but that was freaking awesome. She was incredible. I hope at 92 I can remember the words to one song, much less a five song set from the 30s. I've lived in a bunch of places and I can easily say that Cliff Bell's is the most unique music bar I've ever been in. Again, it's in downtown Detroit.
This was the last picture I took in the city. It was on the wall of an abandoned building across the street from Cliff Bell's. It stood out to me first because I really like this kind of art and I think this one in particular is really cool. The other thing that stood out to me is the contrast in perception I think people would have seeing this piece of art on a wall in Detroit vs. a city like San Francisco. In San Francisco pieces of art like this are everywhere and the hipsters, thugs and high class a like all look at it with some sort of appreciation, but it's seen as art. My assumption, because this wasn't an advertisement and it was on a building that was clearly vacant and behind a chainlink fence, that in Detroit it's probably graffiti. I guess this picture sort of wraps up my own feelings towards Detroit vs. other cities that I've visited or lived in.
Detroit is obviously in this battle perception vs. reality vs something in between. In today's media environment where the blood and guts lead the headlines, Detroit isn't exactly leaving the media searching for stories. But, if you take a look at the news in your city, is it any different? I lived in DC for a year and a half and it's lead the nation in murders/capita on several occasions. Even a city like San Francisco has it's bad parts of town, they're just pushed off to the side, out of view. I'm not trying to instigate a debate over the socio-economic ramifications of urban planning, but there's something to be said about at least trying to keep everything mixed together. It doesn't help Detroit any that it's biggest industry is on the ropes and has been for a while. I don't think I'm blowing minds by suggesting that if the domestic car industry as a whole hadn't taken such a huge hit, all those abandoned burned out buildings would be thriving industry and a city that can hold over 2 million people might still be busting at the seams.
I'm not from Detroit and until seeing it I was one of those people that blindly teased it whenever it was brought up. Detroit has won me over. All it needed was a couple people who still think it's worth saving to show me around. Imagine what might happen if the people of Detroit thought there as value in doing that with their friends, instead of throwing their hands up in defeat.
Detroit has three casinos, the MGM Grand, Greek Town and Motor City. The MGM Grand could easily be in Vegas. It's that nice! Greek Town and Motor City are both really nice as well, but not laid out in your typical giant gaming floor casino style. Both are in renovated buildings. Motor City is in the old Wonder Bread plant which is really cool and Greek Town is in something old as well. Brian, like Jill, loves Michigan, but especially Detroit so he gladly took on the role of tour guide and took us all over Detroit Saturday night once our casino hoping was done.
Detroit is an awesome city. I know that most people will read that and laugh because all you hear about Detroit is how dangerous it is, how there are no jobs and a plethora of other things you wouldn't necessarily associate with a city being described as "awesome." But, I've been to the city twice now, the other time was in the winter, and my opinion was only confirmed more on this trip. I like cities that have character. Cities that when they were built took the time to make their buildings beautiful. Most people when they think of the buildings of Detroit they think of abandoned factories and burned out neighborhoods. But there is some seriously amazing architectural details in Detroit. And not just the biggest buildings that make up the skyline as you're coming in. Pretty much 1 out of 3 buildings, regardless of size or stature in downtown Detroit has really extensive and beautiful details. They didn't just build a bunch of rectangles that shoot to the sky. They built character and that character, whether people chose to look past it or not, is still there today.
We ate dinner at this little place called Small Plates. It was like a tapas restaurant but not Spanish. We all ordered a bunch of stuff and shared. It wasn't the best meal I've ever had in my life but it was good. And, like every meal you buy in downtown Detroit, you're helping a place that obviously needs it. It was nice to support local Detroit business owners instead of eating at a Friday's out in the suburbs.
After dinner we went to Astoria in Greektown for assorted pasties of awesomeness. The place was so packed it took at least 10 minutes just to get your order taken. Not only were the deserts some of the best I've ever had, Astoria is full of character and charm. When people think Detroit, they certainly don't think places like this exist and that's a shame, because it's awesome. The Baklava I ate literally caused an "oh my god" verbal reaction while my mouth was still full from the bite.
Did you know that Detroit is the home to the only urban state park in all of Michigan? Yeah, neither does anybody else because the place was deserted. When we parked I was a bit nervous because it was already dark and we were on the riverside of an abandoned factory or warehouse. But, we were troopers and found a picnic table to eat our treats. I know I keep going on and on about how great it is, but this park was really pretty. It's waterfront location, the Renaissance Center and the rest of the skyline was right there. The Windsor skyline was just across the river. There's a lighthouse. It's quite and peaceful. It's a great park hidden right there in a city where people think the only green spaces exist after a block's been leveled and the grass has started growing back again.
Cliff Bell's as you can see from the menu was established in 1935. I don't want to pretend like I know all the details of their story but I can say, from my experience, this place is awesome! It went under for a while and then somebody bought it and restored it. They didn't renovate, they refurbished, which I think is really cool and only adds to the unique charm. It's a blues/jazz bar. While we were there a 92 year old lady who recorded her first blues album in the 1930s sang with the band. I'm not the biggest live music fan but that was freaking awesome. She was incredible. I hope at 92 I can remember the words to one song, much less a five song set from the 30s. I've lived in a bunch of places and I can easily say that Cliff Bell's is the most unique music bar I've ever been in. Again, it's in downtown Detroit.
This was the last picture I took in the city. It was on the wall of an abandoned building across the street from Cliff Bell's. It stood out to me first because I really like this kind of art and I think this one in particular is really cool. The other thing that stood out to me is the contrast in perception I think people would have seeing this piece of art on a wall in Detroit vs. a city like San Francisco. In San Francisco pieces of art like this are everywhere and the hipsters, thugs and high class a like all look at it with some sort of appreciation, but it's seen as art. My assumption, because this wasn't an advertisement and it was on a building that was clearly vacant and behind a chainlink fence, that in Detroit it's probably graffiti. I guess this picture sort of wraps up my own feelings towards Detroit vs. other cities that I've visited or lived in.
Detroit is obviously in this battle perception vs. reality vs something in between. In today's media environment where the blood and guts lead the headlines, Detroit isn't exactly leaving the media searching for stories. But, if you take a look at the news in your city, is it any different? I lived in DC for a year and a half and it's lead the nation in murders/capita on several occasions. Even a city like San Francisco has it's bad parts of town, they're just pushed off to the side, out of view. I'm not trying to instigate a debate over the socio-economic ramifications of urban planning, but there's something to be said about at least trying to keep everything mixed together. It doesn't help Detroit any that it's biggest industry is on the ropes and has been for a while. I don't think I'm blowing minds by suggesting that if the domestic car industry as a whole hadn't taken such a huge hit, all those abandoned burned out buildings would be thriving industry and a city that can hold over 2 million people might still be busting at the seams.
I'm not from Detroit and until seeing it I was one of those people that blindly teased it whenever it was brought up. Detroit has won me over. All it needed was a couple people who still think it's worth saving to show me around. Imagine what might happen if the people of Detroit thought there as value in doing that with their friends, instead of throwing their hands up in defeat.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Tour of California, Stage 3, What We Learned
We have the slowest, crappiest, cheapest, most un-reliable internet that money can buy thanks to Verizon dumbing down the service but not the prices. But, yesterday, I was able to do what all day I had wondered about and was almost certain that I wouldn't; watch the video feed of the Tour of California (Toc) once I TTd my butt home from work in a kit that was still wet from the morning's slog-fest in. That part isn't important.
I've got to admit really quickly that I was a bit disappointed when the video started and it was just the Versus coverage online. While there is not a better duo, at least in the English speaking world, than Phil Ligget and Paul Sherwen, last year's video cast had Frankie Andreu who would make fun of the riders for doing dumb stuff in the pack. He'd also often forget his mic was on and throw out some f-bombs for good measure. I guess I shouldn't really be surprised he wasn't invited back, though I found it highly entertaining.
Last year when they announced the date change for the ToC I went on record saying I thought it was a bad idea. Mainly, I thought that if you were going to compete against a grand tour for riders, that it made more sense to take on the Vuelta. I still stand behind those statements, but yesterday proved something to me that I thought, but I don't think I ever wrote down.
If you've read this blog enough you'll know that I'm no Levi fan. Not that I don't like Levi, I'm just generally not a fan of his riding style. I think that Levi has benefited greatly from the return of Lance and suddenly he's popular because he has a popular friend. I think most of Levi's fans probably don't even realize he used to follow wheels for Gerolsteiner and got dropped by Lance and others constantly during the Tour de France.
So, back to what I thought but maybe didn't write. We all know that Levi has won the last three editions of the Tour of California and my sneaking suspicion has always been that he was able to win this race because the was the only rider that was actually in peak form. Now, I know we could sit here and debate all day on whether that's his fault or not, or if that should even be a factor that detracts from his victory's, but what we saw yesterday I think proves my point. Last year on Bonny Doon Levi attacked and nobody went with him. Yesterday he attacked and you could clearly see that Michael Rogers and Dave Zabriskie both went across the gap with ease. In fact, Rory Sutherland probably would have made it had he not had to come around both Armstrong and Horner who had started soft pedaling as soon as Levi jumped to create a bigger gap quicker. Maybe Levi saw that the guys came easily so they all just rode a hard tempo instead of more attacking, but when the cameras were there, no one seemed to be in the pain cave.
When they got to the line, Levi finished third. Which means he won the least amount of time bonus of the three. We'll have to see how this all plays out but if I'm Levi I can't be comfortable with the fact that I came to the line with the two biggest threats to beat me and they both got bigger time bonuses than I did. Sure Levi's a good time trialist but last time I checked he's not the former three time world time trial champion or the two time national time trial champ. Those would be Rogers and Zabriskie respectively, if you're wondering.
We'll see how this shakes out but it looks like when the other guys are actually on form Levi's not quite so dominating. This will make things interesting as now it's going to be up to Levi to try and drop those guys on the Big Bear climb (Which isn't very hard according to a lot of the pros) to get back some time before the TT in Los Angeles which, isn't exactly a role that suits Levi.
Maybe I don't agree with where they moved the ToC on the calender but it certainly has made for a much more interesting race already.
I've got to admit really quickly that I was a bit disappointed when the video started and it was just the Versus coverage online. While there is not a better duo, at least in the English speaking world, than Phil Ligget and Paul Sherwen, last year's video cast had Frankie Andreu who would make fun of the riders for doing dumb stuff in the pack. He'd also often forget his mic was on and throw out some f-bombs for good measure. I guess I shouldn't really be surprised he wasn't invited back, though I found it highly entertaining.
Last year when they announced the date change for the ToC I went on record saying I thought it was a bad idea. Mainly, I thought that if you were going to compete against a grand tour for riders, that it made more sense to take on the Vuelta. I still stand behind those statements, but yesterday proved something to me that I thought, but I don't think I ever wrote down.
If you've read this blog enough you'll know that I'm no Levi fan. Not that I don't like Levi, I'm just generally not a fan of his riding style. I think that Levi has benefited greatly from the return of Lance and suddenly he's popular because he has a popular friend. I think most of Levi's fans probably don't even realize he used to follow wheels for Gerolsteiner and got dropped by Lance and others constantly during the Tour de France.
So, back to what I thought but maybe didn't write. We all know that Levi has won the last three editions of the Tour of California and my sneaking suspicion has always been that he was able to win this race because the was the only rider that was actually in peak form. Now, I know we could sit here and debate all day on whether that's his fault or not, or if that should even be a factor that detracts from his victory's, but what we saw yesterday I think proves my point. Last year on Bonny Doon Levi attacked and nobody went with him. Yesterday he attacked and you could clearly see that Michael Rogers and Dave Zabriskie both went across the gap with ease. In fact, Rory Sutherland probably would have made it had he not had to come around both Armstrong and Horner who had started soft pedaling as soon as Levi jumped to create a bigger gap quicker. Maybe Levi saw that the guys came easily so they all just rode a hard tempo instead of more attacking, but when the cameras were there, no one seemed to be in the pain cave.
When they got to the line, Levi finished third. Which means he won the least amount of time bonus of the three. We'll have to see how this all plays out but if I'm Levi I can't be comfortable with the fact that I came to the line with the two biggest threats to beat me and they both got bigger time bonuses than I did. Sure Levi's a good time trialist but last time I checked he's not the former three time world time trial champion or the two time national time trial champ. Those would be Rogers and Zabriskie respectively, if you're wondering.
We'll see how this shakes out but it looks like when the other guys are actually on form Levi's not quite so dominating. This will make things interesting as now it's going to be up to Levi to try and drop those guys on the Big Bear climb (Which isn't very hard according to a lot of the pros) to get back some time before the TT in Los Angeles which, isn't exactly a role that suits Levi.
Maybe I don't agree with where they moved the ToC on the calender but it certainly has made for a much more interesting race already.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Race Report, Poolesville Road Race 5/15
Here's what went down:
Before the gun:
- We lined up and the race official told me my number wasn't visible from the side. Pinning on a race number is like a fine art. I like to think I've gotten pretty good at it. It's a tough balance between getting it on there in a way that it's comfortable and keeping the official happy. The way they want it, it's not comfortable. I guess she wasn't happy with the pin job and the guy next to me had to fix it. I'm pretty sure these officials have never bothered pinning a number on themselves.
Lap 1:
- I felt like crap. I was about half way back in the field for most of it. I had no snap. Every corner seemed like a death march to get back on the wheel in front of me. I somehow ended up in a small pocket of guys who didn't want to ride close to anyone else. They were squirrely so I got out of dodge and moved up.
- The dirt section was uneventful with everybody riding really cautiously.
- Some guy crashed on a little down hill and everybody seemed to get around him. When I came by he was sitting on his butt clutching the back of his neck facing the direction of the race screaming at the top of his lungs. I'm not sure if he was hurt or if this was his strategy to draw attention to the fact that he was in the middle of the road. Hopefully it was the later. It didn't seem like an "I'm in pain scream." It certainly made me take notice. Oh, and I guess the fact that everybody was swerving around him also.
Lap 2:
- A group of about 10 missed a right hand turn and kept going straight. Equal blame should be on the guys who went straight and the road guard in that corner who as basically hidden to the outside of the turn and saying "left turn" while pointing to the right. Of course the guys who were numbers 11-20 went right and instead of sitting up to let these guys get back on, they hit the gas. I've never understood this tactic or etiquette in amateur racing. I'm not saying you have to sit up and wait every time there's a crash or someone gets a flat, but when something like this happens, do you really feel good if you won because some guys didn't make the turn? I shouted to wait, but nobody did so I had to go with the pace. What can you do?
- Gravel section: Uneventful except for the two guys behind me who were dropping F-bombs at each other for something. I thought they were joking till I looked back and saw rage in both their eyes. I was sort of hoping they'd fight. That'd have been funny.
- There was one guy off the front and nobody was riding. I took about a 2 mile pull to just see if the body would respond. I wasn't exactly punching the gas during this pull but at least I put my nose in the wind and came through the start/finish where Jill was sitting on the front of the group. That turn was sharper than I remembered and I almost overcooked it. Almost.
Lap 3:
- I moved off the front and flicked my elbow. Nobody came through. I look back and the guy behind me looks dead. So, I move back over to the front and keep driving it.
- Gravel Section: Finally some excitement! Three dudes go down on the inside of the turn. Me and another guy have to go around them changing our lines once we're already in the gravel. I see his rear wheel slide and I feel mine do the same. We both get back on the packed stuff and chase back onto the group. Well, actually that wasn't that exciting at all.
- I get to the inside of the group to get a shield from the wind on this back section. This position means I'm forced into the gutter a bit later as a couple guys are moving to their right for some reason. I can't say for sure, but this is probably where I hit some weird section of pavement or rocks or sticks or some sort of shrapnel.
- About a mile later a guy behind me is saying "NCVC you're flat." But there's like 1,000 NCVC riders per field so I have no idea if he's talking to me or not and since I don't feel like I'm flat I ignore him. He says it again. I look down and it doesn't look like either tire is flat. He rides up beside me to ensure that he's talking to me. I look back down, I'm flat. I throw my hand up in the air so people will go around me and I coast to a stop. I'm pretty sure I curse a lot in the process.
- I wait for the sag wagon. Day over.
It's a shame. I was starting to feel better and where I flatted we only had a bit more and 1 lap to go, probably like 10 miles or so left. Definitely enough to stay in and see what happened. Maybe take a last lap dig. I was trying to figure out what I thought might make the most sense. For all the hype built up around this race about how hard the course was, I found it to be just the opposite. I was feeling like total crap for the first 20 miles and was still able to safely stay in the field. When I pre-rode the thing solo I thought it was hard, but maybe that's because I already had 60 miles in my legs before getting there? Who knows. I have no idea who even won. Once I was flat and got a ride back to the parking lot, I walked back to meet Jill, we got in the car, and left.
An odd thing that stood out:
There was a lot of cursing in this race which I'm generally a fan of. I don't know if it was high nerves because everybody was scared to flat out or what but it seemed like the slightest touches or movement made guys fly off the handle at each other. There's one little steep pitch after the gravel section that nobody was really riding up very fast. On the second lap one guy moved over into another guy on the right and the guy on the right just lit into him, "M-fer, get the f off of me. Ride a straight f-ing line." The guy who receiving this lashing immediately blamed somebody else for moving in on him, which is clearly the right defense, even though as I was right behind them, it was totally his fault. This guy caused a crash a few weeks ago, he sucks at riding his bike in a straight line. But this was just an example where I was right there to see it go down. There were f-bombs been tossed around everywhere. Lots of angry Cat 4s. Must be something in the water?
Before the gun:
- We lined up and the race official told me my number wasn't visible from the side. Pinning on a race number is like a fine art. I like to think I've gotten pretty good at it. It's a tough balance between getting it on there in a way that it's comfortable and keeping the official happy. The way they want it, it's not comfortable. I guess she wasn't happy with the pin job and the guy next to me had to fix it. I'm pretty sure these officials have never bothered pinning a number on themselves.
Lap 1:
- I felt like crap. I was about half way back in the field for most of it. I had no snap. Every corner seemed like a death march to get back on the wheel in front of me. I somehow ended up in a small pocket of guys who didn't want to ride close to anyone else. They were squirrely so I got out of dodge and moved up.
- The dirt section was uneventful with everybody riding really cautiously.
- Some guy crashed on a little down hill and everybody seemed to get around him. When I came by he was sitting on his butt clutching the back of his neck facing the direction of the race screaming at the top of his lungs. I'm not sure if he was hurt or if this was his strategy to draw attention to the fact that he was in the middle of the road. Hopefully it was the later. It didn't seem like an "I'm in pain scream." It certainly made me take notice. Oh, and I guess the fact that everybody was swerving around him also.
Lap 2:
- A group of about 10 missed a right hand turn and kept going straight. Equal blame should be on the guys who went straight and the road guard in that corner who as basically hidden to the outside of the turn and saying "left turn" while pointing to the right. Of course the guys who were numbers 11-20 went right and instead of sitting up to let these guys get back on, they hit the gas. I've never understood this tactic or etiquette in amateur racing. I'm not saying you have to sit up and wait every time there's a crash or someone gets a flat, but when something like this happens, do you really feel good if you won because some guys didn't make the turn? I shouted to wait, but nobody did so I had to go with the pace. What can you do?
- Gravel section: Uneventful except for the two guys behind me who were dropping F-bombs at each other for something. I thought they were joking till I looked back and saw rage in both their eyes. I was sort of hoping they'd fight. That'd have been funny.
- There was one guy off the front and nobody was riding. I took about a 2 mile pull to just see if the body would respond. I wasn't exactly punching the gas during this pull but at least I put my nose in the wind and came through the start/finish where Jill was sitting on the front of the group. That turn was sharper than I remembered and I almost overcooked it. Almost.
Lap 3:
- I moved off the front and flicked my elbow. Nobody came through. I look back and the guy behind me looks dead. So, I move back over to the front and keep driving it.
- Gravel Section: Finally some excitement! Three dudes go down on the inside of the turn. Me and another guy have to go around them changing our lines once we're already in the gravel. I see his rear wheel slide and I feel mine do the same. We both get back on the packed stuff and chase back onto the group. Well, actually that wasn't that exciting at all.
- I get to the inside of the group to get a shield from the wind on this back section. This position means I'm forced into the gutter a bit later as a couple guys are moving to their right for some reason. I can't say for sure, but this is probably where I hit some weird section of pavement or rocks or sticks or some sort of shrapnel.
- About a mile later a guy behind me is saying "NCVC you're flat." But there's like 1,000 NCVC riders per field so I have no idea if he's talking to me or not and since I don't feel like I'm flat I ignore him. He says it again. I look down and it doesn't look like either tire is flat. He rides up beside me to ensure that he's talking to me. I look back down, I'm flat. I throw my hand up in the air so people will go around me and I coast to a stop. I'm pretty sure I curse a lot in the process.
- I wait for the sag wagon. Day over.
It's a shame. I was starting to feel better and where I flatted we only had a bit more and 1 lap to go, probably like 10 miles or so left. Definitely enough to stay in and see what happened. Maybe take a last lap dig. I was trying to figure out what I thought might make the most sense. For all the hype built up around this race about how hard the course was, I found it to be just the opposite. I was feeling like total crap for the first 20 miles and was still able to safely stay in the field. When I pre-rode the thing solo I thought it was hard, but maybe that's because I already had 60 miles in my legs before getting there? Who knows. I have no idea who even won. Once I was flat and got a ride back to the parking lot, I walked back to meet Jill, we got in the car, and left.
An odd thing that stood out:
There was a lot of cursing in this race which I'm generally a fan of. I don't know if it was high nerves because everybody was scared to flat out or what but it seemed like the slightest touches or movement made guys fly off the handle at each other. There's one little steep pitch after the gravel section that nobody was really riding up very fast. On the second lap one guy moved over into another guy on the right and the guy on the right just lit into him, "M-fer, get the f off of me. Ride a straight f-ing line." The guy who receiving this lashing immediately blamed somebody else for moving in on him, which is clearly the right defense, even though as I was right behind them, it was totally his fault. This guy caused a crash a few weeks ago, he sucks at riding his bike in a straight line. But this was just an example where I was right there to see it go down. There were f-bombs been tossed around everywhere. Lots of angry Cat 4s. Must be something in the water?
Thursday, May 13, 2010
The War Wages On
A lot gets made of the cyclist vs. driver civil war that has been waged. It seems like every month there's another magazine that puts out another list ranking it's 10-50 most bike friendly cities. Having lived and ridden in two cities that are generally pretty high on those lists and in one that doesn't I feel like with pretty good authority I can say that the general motorist in Portland is no friendlier to me as a cyclist than your average metro-DC driver. You might find that odd because of all the articles you read about how Portland is nothing but a series of bike lanes connecting one side of town to the other, and while that's true, so is DC. No matter how many bike lanes a city builds, the motorist who is forced to cautiously pass a cyclist, thus forcing them to slow down from whatever speed they were traveling, is going to be annoyed. That's just how it is. Portland is the owner of great statistics like 6% of their residents commute to work by bicycle and they won't build a mile of road without building a mile of bike path/lane. Those are great and all, but that's still 94% of people who use some sort of motor to get to work and would prefer their tax dollars go to something else besides infrastructure that slows down their motorized commute.
By now I'm sure that everyone is aware of the Tony Kornheiser rant. If you're not, allow me to recap without bothering to look for a link or even linking you to my own discussion of said rant on this blog. Kornheiser, annoyed by a new set of bike lanes that have been proposed, suggested that motorists just run bikes down. "Give them a little bump" is a much better paraphrase. Then the all mighty Lance Armstrong got wind of it, called Mr. Tony and they had a dialogue. Mr. Tony apologized and then Levi Leipheimer tweeted something that he thought made him sound tough saying he'd never heard of Tony Kornheiser. Got news for your Levi, he's never heard of you either. But I digress. I bring up this point because it's just one more example of how in today's world of where people want to be eco friendly and "green up their lives," there's still an on going battle for the right to the road between cars and people on bikes. I don't think it's going to go away, but there's a lot more positive thinking people out there than me looking to do anything to make even the smallest difference.
That brings me to my point, sort of. Somehow, and this is beyond me because I haven't been a subscriber to Bicycling magazine in about five years, I have ended up on their email distribution list. So, about once a week I am treated to the same electronic articles that convinced me to stop paying for their print version. Any one who can competently show up and not get yelled at on your fast local group ride will have a hard time finding any article in Bicycling magazine that is either useful or interesting. I feel the same way about Runner's World and Triathlete, but that's another topic for another day. The subject line of these emails is always the headline of the most important article and today's really caught my attention, "How to Drive Around Cyclists." I'm obviously a cynic but they really paid someone to write this and then paid another person to put it into a online friendly format with graphics they basically stole out of a 15 year old's drivers ed manual.
Please, take a second an flip through, but don't spend too much time, there's nothing in there worth reading. Maybe, even though I'm a cynic, I give people too much credit because the biggest problem I have with this is the entire 16 page/point article can be summed up in 1, "Use common sense." Maybe most people don't have common sense? Maybe that's a portion of brain activity that goes completely blank when they see an odd two wheeled person in front of them on the road. They point out all these factors like, the two second rule, the 3 feet rule, slow passing makes for safe passing (which I'm not sure I agree with), etc. These are things you teach to a 15 year old who is going to take a driver's test and by the time they are 16 and two weeks will have forgotten it all to simply let the common sense of driving take over. Having moved from VA to CA to OR and now back I have taken all three states written driver's tests. I am a really good driver. I've never been in an accident that was my fault and I haven't been stopped for speeding in over 4 years. Still, it took me two tries at the CA test to pass and I only passed the OR test on the first try by one point. The score on that test has no correlation with one's ability to drive a car. It has a direct correlation with one's ability to memorize a bunch of crap that happens less than 1% of the time when you're behind the wheel.
Regardless, isn't this little electronic pamphlet directed to the wrong crowd? Ostensibly the people reading it are the people on the bikes and when they are in their cars they're probably not the ones laying on the horn when there's traffic an a cyclist is keeping them from getting to the next stop sign two seconds sooner. I suppose it's a great effort to produce some sort of little manual on the 15 most important tips for not killing a cyclist, but shouldn't it be distributed to the drivers? There's a reason that Martin Luther nailed The Ninety-Five Thesis to the church door and didn't just distribute it at his underground meeting. It's safe to say that Martin Luther does not work at Bicycling magazine.
I think my point, if I'm making one at all, is that it doesn't matter where you live, how many bike lanes or multi-use trails you have access to, at some point, you have to ride in the road and chances are both you and the cars sharing that space, wish the other wasn't there. The driver doesn't need a lesson on how to get around the cyclist just like the cyclist doesn't need a lesson on how to let the driver's by, though sometimes, neither of these are true statements. But that's life. There will be cars and there will be bikes and as long as you don't hit me I won't throw my water bottle at you. I think that's a pretty fair compromise.
By now I'm sure that everyone is aware of the Tony Kornheiser rant. If you're not, allow me to recap without bothering to look for a link or even linking you to my own discussion of said rant on this blog. Kornheiser, annoyed by a new set of bike lanes that have been proposed, suggested that motorists just run bikes down. "Give them a little bump" is a much better paraphrase. Then the all mighty Lance Armstrong got wind of it, called Mr. Tony and they had a dialogue. Mr. Tony apologized and then Levi Leipheimer tweeted something that he thought made him sound tough saying he'd never heard of Tony Kornheiser. Got news for your Levi, he's never heard of you either. But I digress. I bring up this point because it's just one more example of how in today's world of where people want to be eco friendly and "green up their lives," there's still an on going battle for the right to the road between cars and people on bikes. I don't think it's going to go away, but there's a lot more positive thinking people out there than me looking to do anything to make even the smallest difference.
That brings me to my point, sort of. Somehow, and this is beyond me because I haven't been a subscriber to Bicycling magazine in about five years, I have ended up on their email distribution list. So, about once a week I am treated to the same electronic articles that convinced me to stop paying for their print version. Any one who can competently show up and not get yelled at on your fast local group ride will have a hard time finding any article in Bicycling magazine that is either useful or interesting. I feel the same way about Runner's World and Triathlete, but that's another topic for another day. The subject line of these emails is always the headline of the most important article and today's really caught my attention, "How to Drive Around Cyclists." I'm obviously a cynic but they really paid someone to write this and then paid another person to put it into a online friendly format with graphics they basically stole out of a 15 year old's drivers ed manual.
Please, take a second an flip through, but don't spend too much time, there's nothing in there worth reading. Maybe, even though I'm a cynic, I give people too much credit because the biggest problem I have with this is the entire 16 page/point article can be summed up in 1, "Use common sense." Maybe most people don't have common sense? Maybe that's a portion of brain activity that goes completely blank when they see an odd two wheeled person in front of them on the road. They point out all these factors like, the two second rule, the 3 feet rule, slow passing makes for safe passing (which I'm not sure I agree with), etc. These are things you teach to a 15 year old who is going to take a driver's test and by the time they are 16 and two weeks will have forgotten it all to simply let the common sense of driving take over. Having moved from VA to CA to OR and now back I have taken all three states written driver's tests. I am a really good driver. I've never been in an accident that was my fault and I haven't been stopped for speeding in over 4 years. Still, it took me two tries at the CA test to pass and I only passed the OR test on the first try by one point. The score on that test has no correlation with one's ability to drive a car. It has a direct correlation with one's ability to memorize a bunch of crap that happens less than 1% of the time when you're behind the wheel.
Regardless, isn't this little electronic pamphlet directed to the wrong crowd? Ostensibly the people reading it are the people on the bikes and when they are in their cars they're probably not the ones laying on the horn when there's traffic an a cyclist is keeping them from getting to the next stop sign two seconds sooner. I suppose it's a great effort to produce some sort of little manual on the 15 most important tips for not killing a cyclist, but shouldn't it be distributed to the drivers? There's a reason that Martin Luther nailed The Ninety-Five Thesis to the church door and didn't just distribute it at his underground meeting. It's safe to say that Martin Luther does not work at Bicycling magazine.
I think my point, if I'm making one at all, is that it doesn't matter where you live, how many bike lanes or multi-use trails you have access to, at some point, you have to ride in the road and chances are both you and the cars sharing that space, wish the other wasn't there. The driver doesn't need a lesson on how to get around the cyclist just like the cyclist doesn't need a lesson on how to let the driver's by, though sometimes, neither of these are true statements. But that's life. There will be cars and there will be bikes and as long as you don't hit me I won't throw my water bottle at you. I think that's a pretty fair compromise.
Friday, May 07, 2010
Cadel Evans Values Personal Space
Due to the fact that I get the majority of my cycling news from sources that discuss Lance's last bowel movement as if it's an indicator to his next TT ride (probably mediocre), I've been left to think that Cadel Evans is a meek, mild, shy guy who more or less just follows wheels and is afraid to take chances to win. I'm not completely sure that last part isn't true, but I like it's more likely that Cadel Evans is grossly aware of his own limiters and when the el pisterola hits it, he's well aware he's already on the limit and rides tempo to manage losses rather than chase, blow up, and lose a lot more. This isn't very exciting racing, but it is smart racing. I can think of another guy who for years and years rode with the same style and used to get the same criticisms but now seems to have revamped his image through twitter after hanging out with a guy who is really good at PR and personal branding. (If you can guess this rider, please do so in the comments and you'll receive an electronic long distance high five from TeamLandall.)
Yesterday, in my quest for bike tossing videos I ran across a couple videos of Cadel that I had to watch a few times to believe it was actually him. Maybe Cadel isn't such a soft guy after all. I know us Americans like to pretend like we're tough, but when it comes to feelings and shit we're all a lot more sensitive than our straight forward talking European and Australian Earth-mates. These videos seriously changed the way I think of Cadel Evans. I'm not sure it elevated his chances of winning any Grand Tours (although this Giro seems a little thin on high end talent whose real goals aren't the Tour de France.) but it certainly changed my perception of him as a soft guy who wouldn't punch back, literally.
I don't think he's interested in being interviewed:
The threat to cut someone's head off is probably enough, but listen to the laugh after he says it, creepy!
So, what have we learned today, Cadel Evans may not ever win the Tour de France but your critique of him should be done at a safe distance.
Yesterday, in my quest for bike tossing videos I ran across a couple videos of Cadel that I had to watch a few times to believe it was actually him. Maybe Cadel isn't such a soft guy after all. I know us Americans like to pretend like we're tough, but when it comes to feelings and shit we're all a lot more sensitive than our straight forward talking European and Australian Earth-mates. These videos seriously changed the way I think of Cadel Evans. I'm not sure it elevated his chances of winning any Grand Tours (although this Giro seems a little thin on high end talent whose real goals aren't the Tour de France.) but it certainly changed my perception of him as a soft guy who wouldn't punch back, literally.
I don't think he's interested in being interviewed:
The threat to cut someone's head off is probably enough, but listen to the laugh after he says it, creepy!
So, what have we learned today, Cadel Evans may not ever win the Tour de France but your critique of him should be done at a safe distance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)