flythebike

Talking about cycling today feels like fiddling while Rome burns. But, https://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=4252 that interview with Paul Sherwen is enlightening. Or something.

wagathon

That's a great concluding observation. If someone wants to think the worst, they'd probably assume that Floyd put out a superhuman effort. However, it was a very human effort for him and the tactics and assumptions of all of the teams and riders behind him contributed to his ability to make up as much time as he did in Stage 17.

Blaireau

Thanks for the link -ther are other good interviews on that site.

I thought that it was interesting to note the inherent contradiction of Sherwen's comments, a guy whom I admire and like by the way.
On the one hand he applauded the decision of various teams to kick out the likes of Basso, Ulrich and others based on nothing but SUSPICION. On the other hand, he wanted the presumption of innocence to apply to Flyod Flandis...

flythebike

Yeah but Sherwin knows Landis, not Ully et. al. So while the contradiction exists for us, it is a blind spot for him. This article https://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tou...to942608.shtml brings this to light a bit more - that according to Sherwin and others, the culture of doping didn't exist in Postal/Disco, but elsewhere, these riders have fallen under the influcence of lesser lights than Armstrong, and paid homage to the needle, rather than the wheels. Gives you the feeling again of what a driven visionary Armstrong was when it came to Le Tour.