Professional Cycling For the Fans - Lance riding the Giro is a mistake

I'm going to have to find video of that TT.

OT question from the rookie: what do numbers 30x36 refer to - I've seen this written with different numbers several places, but haven't been able to figure it out.

Ebeth, that refers to chainring x rear cog, so 30x36 is the smallest (granny gear) up front and largest cog, i.e., the easiest gear. A 30x36 is even a negative gear ratio I believe (http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/), meaning your feet are rotating faster than your wheel. Pros generally don't use triple chainrings BTW so no granny gear for them.

ebeth, if you end up buying a copy of the 2008 Giro d'Italia race DVD, it is well worth watching several times over. Last year's race was spectacular, even with the guys who ended up hurting things by getting bagged for drug doping (like Ricardo Ricco). The mountain stages are incredibly exciting!

Last year's Giro was great, it was funny seeing Contador beating the crap out of the other guys while coming back from his supposed holidays on the beach. There was one stage where he was beaten by Ricco who later on in the Tour revealed his true colors by being caught doping.

Ebeth, that refers to chainring x rear cog, so 30x36 is the smallest (granny gear) up front and largest cog, i.e., the easiest gear. A 30x36 is even a negative gear ratio I believe (http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/), meaning your feet are rotating faster than your wheel. Pros generally don't use triple chainrings BTW so no granny gear for them.

One of the details I wish race TV would cover is the various gear choices a rider would request from his mechanic on a particular stage. They sometimes will show a rider's bike but they never get into gearing details. Occasionally during race coverage they will show a drivetrain being lubed from a car and you can see the gear a rider is in, and sometimes they will mention a rider being in a particular chain ring but (on TV) you never hear about the number of teeth on sprockets or rings except in the most general of ways.

The Giro rocks... it gets crazy ..

One of the details I wish race TV would cover is the various gear choices a rider would request from his mechanic on a particular stage. They sometimes will show a rider's bike but they never get into gearing details. Occasionally during race coverage they will show a drivetrain being lubed from a car and you can see the gear a rider is in, and sometimes they will mention a rider being in a particular chain ring but (on TV) you never hear about the number of teeth on sprockets or rings except in the most general of ways.

You're right, you'd never know how central gear choices are to the riders. Most of us non-pros don't change cassettes depending on our ride but talking gears isn't just a bike-nerd thing, any more than talking fastballs and sliders is just for baseball nerds. It's pretty important. But I'm not sure VS wants to or can go into those details. To be fair, I'm sure cycling is a very difficult sport to cover well, as opposed to tennis where the players stay put. But VS is taking the European feed and overlapping in with lots of graphics and whooshes, and bull-riding ads, and throughout the action, I think they have to rely on what the camera shows them. When they do a little technical aside, they whoosh in, talk to the expert for about 20 seconds and whoosh back out. It can start to feel a might dumbed down.

OK, so does anyone know if VS is going to show any of the Giro? Thier schedule does not show any coverage?

I would also like to see what gears they are in!!!!

I don't understand why Lance is riding in the Giro d'Italia this year.

I'd be willing to bet 3 things:

1) you don't follow bike racing other than the TDF,

2) you did not follow the TDF prior to 1999,

3) you're an American.

Nothing wrong with any of those.

But I'm also willing to bet that the majority of cycling fans that do not fit that matrix (at least the ones that don't hate Armstrong) are interested to see him in the Giro.

The Giro was moved a week later in the mid 90's.

That probably puts it after Mig in 92 and 93. But Pantani won both in 98.

Pantani also picked up the KOM jersey in the Giro that year. Making him one of the rare 3 major jerseys in one year club members.

I'd be willing to bet 3 things:

1) you don't follow bike racing other than the TDF,

2) you did not follow the TDF prior to 1999,

3) you're an American.

Nothing wrong with any of those.

But I'm also willing to bet that the majority of cycling fans that do not fit that matrix (at least the ones that don't hate Armstrong) are interested to see him in the Giro.

Wow, way to quote my one sentence out of the whole paragraph and generalizing me. What you don't get and what lots of other people don't get is that I'm not arguing at all about the excitement and fun of watching the Giro. I'm not saying at all that Giro is a bad race. It is a great race with tough mountain stages, and much much more unexpected attacks and crazy fans. However, bottom line and the fact is that the Tour de France in the modern era brings the best GC riders (except Contador last year b/c he couldn't ride in the Tour) in the top form, best teams, and the most pressure out of all of the races.

I'm a fan of competition. I want to see the best duke it out. I feel like I've repeated myself over and over.

Wow, way to quote my one sentence out of the whole paragraph and generalizing me. What you don't get and what lots of other people don't get is that I'm not arguing at all about the excitement and fun of watching the Giro. I'm not saying at all that Giro is a bad race. It is a great race with tough mountain stages, and much much more unexpected attacks and crazy fans. However, bottom line and the fact is that the Tour de France in the modern era brings the best GC riders (except Contador last year b/c he couldn't ride in the Tour) in the top form, best teams, and the most pressure out of all of the races.

I'm a fan of competition. I want to see the best duke it out. I feel like I've repeated myself over and over.

The same teams that are in the tour will be in the giro, save the local wildcards.
It is like comparing the Indy 500 to the Daytona 500, not the same but equally exciting and more times than not the Giro has better racing.

The same teams that are in the tour will be in the giro, save the local wildcards.
It is like comparing the Indy 500 to the Daytona 500, not the same but equally exciting and more times than not the Giro has better racing.

First of all, your analogy is just dumb and doesn't make sense. You begin by saying tour and giro basically have same teams competing and comparing that Indy and Dayton which they use completely different cars and drivers.

Second, I don't know how many times I have to repeat about this; I'm not saying anything about Giro is not exciting or is not better racing. Read what I write before replying directly to me.

Third, Tour and Giro having same teams doesn't mean they're using the same roster.

First of all, your analogy is just dumb and doesn't make sense. You begin by saying tour and giro basically have same teams competing and comparing that Indy and Dayton which they use completely different cars and drivers.

Second, I don't know how many times I have to repeat about this; I'm not saying anything about Giro is not exciting or is not better racing. Read what I write before replying directly to me.

Third, Tour and Giro having same teams doesn't mean they're using the same roster.

Maybe it was the person reading it, I'll explain it for you.
The Indy 500 and Daytona 500 are both great races and it would be hard to say one it better than the other because there are so many differences.
So what I am saying is that the tour and the Giro, although both bicycle races, have a great many differences(culturally, competitor, route, etc...). Many riders would rather peak for the giro than the tour, your idea that the tour is the crowning glory of cycling and that every cyclist should try and win it is just your opinion.
There is a pride in saying you have won the Giro as it carries a different sense of pride with it than the Tour, nobody wants to be a one trick pony.
Who is to say that riding the giro means you won't ride tour? Plenty of riders have done both and done very well riding both in the same year.
Sounds like your making excuses for LA in case he loses.

Yes, there are many riders who've done well in both Giro and the Tour in the same year. It's the miracle of doping.

And again Vinofan, noone is arguing which race is better or more fun to watch. All I'm saying is that in the modern era, Tour brings the BEST GC riders competing at their peak.
Yes, many riders do peak for the Giro; the riders who can't win the Tour. It doesn't go vice-versa. The riders who can win the Tour can win the Giro. Giro course may be tougher, but Tour has more pressure and BEST riders.

One of the details I wish race TV would cover is the various gear choices a rider would request from his mechanic on a particular stage. They sometimes will show a rider's bike but they never get into gearing details.

Yeah, I wish they would provide more details occasionally too. Every once in a while, on a particularly hilly stage, like the Marmolada or l'Alpe d'Huez, Paul Sherwen might say something to the effect that the riders are carrying a 25 tooth cog or something. But not very often. I guess they figure if they start diving into specifics about how light a set of climbing wheels might be or what the actual gearing is on a TT bike, they risk losing the less-than-hardcore viewer. I think it's a risk worth taking...we wanna know!

It's nice to see him do it. He's been such a one trick pony for so long he should get some credit for trying something different.

As far as gear ratios, Peta at the Giro a few years back was sprinting in a 53x11 at 110 rpm. Amazing.

Yes, many riders do peak for the Giro; the riders who can't win the Tour.

You mean like Indurain? Oops, never mind.

^^^^^^ :lol:

A lot of stars and champions move on to a support role in their later years, in all kinds of sports to include cycling. Very common, and many see it as a responisibility to stick around and use experience to give big brother advice to the new, younger stars and champions.
As far as the Tour de France...commercially it is the biggest race, but many pro tour riders do not see it as the greatest race. The Giro, Paris Roubaix, and others are often seen by Europeans as the most romantic, dramatic or exciting races, and they are still dominated by Europeans. Personally Paris Roubaix is my favorite race to watch, but it never is on TV where I live in the US.

Personally Paris Roubaix is my favorite race to watch, but it never is on TV where I live in the US.

Agreed! I would love to be on the roadside in the Ardennes, on the rainiest, muddiest, sloppiest day imaginable. Yelling at the riders bouncing off the cobbles, getting splattered with mud, soaked to the bone. When can we go? :D

Wow, way to quote my one sentence out of the whole paragraph and generalizing me. What you don't get and what lots of other people don't get is that I'm not arguing at all about the excitement and fun of watching the Giro. I'm not saying at all that Giro is a bad race. It is a great race with tough mountain stages, and much much more unexpected attacks and crazy fans. However, bottom line and the fact is that the Tour de France in the modern era brings the best GC riders (except Contador last year b/c he couldn't ride in the Tour) in the top form, best teams, and the most pressure out of all of the races.

I'm a fan of competition. I want to see the best duke it out. I feel like I've repeated myself over and over.

Except the best Italian racers race in the Giro and are not peaking for the Tour.



Ebeth, that refers to chainring x rear cog, so 30x36 is the smallest (granny gear) up front and largest cog, i.e., the easiest gear. A 30x36 is even a negative gear ratio I believe (http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/), meaning your feet are rotating faster than your wheel. Pros generally don't use triple chainrings BTW so no granny gear for them.

Correct, but when was the last time a pro used a triple in a Grand Tour? If you answered stage 17 in the Giro, you also would be correct.

I actually think that one of the reasons for his comeback (although not a primary one), was to ride in the Giro. Imagine, having won the Tour 7 times, but never having ridden in the Giro. If I were in his position, I surely would want to do it.

Definitely not a mistake IMO. Consider, if he doesn't have it to win the Tour, he has a very honorable excuse for it.

he stated the other day that he is looking for at least a top ten in the giro. it's starting to look more and more like he really is gearing up for the tour. i think in the back of his mind he really wants number eight. could he actually win both races?

could he actually win both races?

Nope.

I'm going to have to find video of that TT.

OT question from the rookie: what do numbers 30x36 refer to - I've seen this written with different numbers several places, but haven't been able to figure it out.

40 cent gave a good explanation of the gears but it's possible the humor of that original statement wasn't completely understood by some. 30 x 36 is the kind of low gearing you see on a mountain bike. The kind of gearing we mere mortals climb with. The TDF riders will climb the kinds of hills we do in a 30 x 36 gearing in something like a 36 x 28 or a 42 x 26. Depending on how steep the climbs are. In other words, while we are cranking out a 10-12% grade at 4-7 mph they are going around 12-14 mph on the same slope for long periods of time.

Not a great Lance fan, but still would like to see him concentrate on the Giro, even if that means he wins it!

Why? Because I want to see the Giro on T.V. - that's all.

If Lance does not win the Giro, all bets are off and Conti better watch his back!

God I love this sport!

No point taking anything the protagonists say too seriously at this point in the year: there is plenty of preparation time left before we see what the Astana riders have got in Italy.

Do I think Armstrong went to all the trouble of coming out of retirement to ride as a super-domestique? No. Would he ride the Giro as a training aid? Yes. Would he sacrifice a Giro or Tour win because of a promise- or other agreement? Would you?

We've seen these soap operas before. It's all a smokescreen until we see how much Armstrong has left in the tank. I would be amazed if Armstrong spent the best days of racing he has left, in the service of another rider. Talk of working for Contador may be the political thing to say- hell, Contador may even believe it himself- but the main purpose of the talk must be to deflect pressure from Armstrong, who's ceiling may never again be at an elite level, for a three week race. If he feels good in May, though, he'll be looking for a podium finish in June or July.

YOu also have to consider that fact that Astana is not paying Lance. And that he has never been a domestique (super of otherwise)...at least not in Le Tour.
I do not claim to know what is going on in Lance's head, but I honestly think that it does not matter to him if he wins anything this year. I believe that he will go out and ride his hardest, and if he podiums, great, if not then he has gotten his anti-cancer message out to a world-wide audience and brought lots of attention to it and to his foundation.
Also take into account that breaking his collarbone today will hurt his training schedule, and may keep him out of the Giro. Since it starts May 9, and he could be out in excess of 6 weeks...

Love him or hate him, Armstrong IS cycling in the 2000's. People who could care less about a bike or racing will follow Armstrong. I was watching MSNBC at lunch today when along came the News Flash "Lance was in a crash". When Armstrong shows for the Tour de Georgia the crowds quadruple in size.
Put him in the Tour de France, drug testers look the other way. Take him of the team & the team is banned from the tour. Armstrong is money.

Put him in the Tour de France, drug testers look the other way. Take him of the team & the team is banned from the tour. Armstrong is money.

Several days ago they were taking hair samples from him for drug testing. I'm not sure I'd call that "looking the other way."

Several days ago they were taking hair samples from him for drug testing. I'm not sure I'd call that "looking the other way."

The ASO was crapped on the for the first 7. They will not let it go again.

Lance is also the most tested athlete in history. So far this season, he has submitted to drug control in excess of 25 times, whereas the "average" professional cyclist is currently at something like 10 tests.

The ASO was crapped on the for the first 7. They will not let it go again.

What does this mean? Are you saying that all of his previous TDF wins were because of doping?

Not because of doping, but because doping was treated as if it didn't exist.

Put him in the Tour de France, drug testers look the other way. Take him of the team & the team is banned from the tour. Armstrong is money.
Agree that Armstrong raises attention to the sport, and not just in the U.S.
I'd disagree that drug-testers look the other way, but people have already made my point there.

I'd also disagree that Astana's invite to this years TDF is only b/c Lance is on the team. They would have been invited whether Lance was cycling or not. Astana has two of the best grand tour riders right now in Contador and Leipheimer.

I'd also disagree that Astana's invite to this years TDF is only b/c Lance is on the team. They would have been invited whether Lance was cycling or not. Astana has two of the best grand tour riders right now in Contador and Leipheimer.

Agreed. And the Castille y Leon (although it is not being covered by media in my area, and I can only find video online), is shaping up into a nice battle for Team Astana...1,2,3. I would love to see Leipheimer walk all over Contador.

Lance is also the most tested athlete in history. So far this season, he has submitted to drug control in excess of 25 times, whereas the "average" professional cyclist is currently at something like 10 tests.
Yeah, I don't buy that particular claim; I'm sure he was and is tested about as much as any other top-tier cyclist -- possibly less. AFAIK he rode in fewer events during his prime years than most cyclists of his caliber, so that he could focus on the Tour. Fewer events = fewer tests.

And everyone's getting tested with a high level of frequency, due to the UCI's "biological passport" program.

Unfortunately, it's also the case that many drugs were and are undetectable. While I do not know of any substantial reason to accuse Lance of doping, pointing out that he's never had a positive in competition is sort of like saying "I've never gotten a speeding ticket, thus I have proven that I have never broken the speed limit." ;)

Lance is also the most tested athlete in history. So far this season, he has submitted to drug control in excess of 25 times, whereas the "average" professional cyclist is currently at something like 10 tests.

People only believe this because Lance keeps saying it, there is no proof of this other than the claims of LA.

Armstrong , Disco & the followers, convinced the ASO that the testing as it stood was doing it's job. No need for more refined testing. Armstrong wins 7 tours under this umbrella. Armstrong retires just as stronger tests are employed, ASO realizes that rampant & widespread doping was the norm for the last 15 years. They feel used by Armstrong/Disco & refuse to invite them to THE TOUR even under the new name Astania. The rest is history.

I think it would do more for Lance's image in racing to win the Giro instead of another ToF. I have no idea if that is possible, but he is on the best team hands down. Also I think this is the 100th Giro - if I am correct it would be a nice one to win.

My guess is that the big three got together and decided that the team would start the Giro with Lance as the leader, the ToF with Contador and and ToC with Leipheimer. If this leader cant do it then the next strongest is the man.

I am happy Lance is back becuase it brings so much more focus on cycling and he does seem to have a very worthy cause he is pushing. I see no down side.

I am happy Lance is back becuase it brings so much more focus on cycling and he does seem to have a very worthy cause he is pushing. I see no down side.

The Italian tourism bureau is sure happy he's back, and hoping he still rides the Giro.

I'd say with the broken collarbone, he may still ride the Giro but not to win. It's too much of a setback in his training schedule, and he was already playing catch-up after 3 years out. And Contador's not scheduled to ride the Giro. But maybe Bruyneel will switch things up.

People only believe this because Lance keeps saying it, there is no proof of this other than the claims of LA.

I have never heard Lance say this. However, if you look at how much he has been tested since Jan 1, it is currently at 25 times. That is in excess if you consider that tomorrow we are 13 weeks into 2009, that makes almost twice per week, with each test constituting blood, urine and hair. Is that not just a bit excessive?

And make no mistake, he is not complaining, as he understands that it goes along with being Lance Armstrong.

I have never heard Lance say this. However, if you look at how much he has been tested since Jan 1, it is currently at 25 times. That is in excess if you consider that tomorrow we are 13 weeks into 2009, that makes almost twice per week, with each test constituting blood, urine and hair. Is that not just a bit excessive?

And make no mistake, he is not complaining, as he understands that it goes along with being Lance Armstrong.

I looked at the UCI website for anti doping information and was unable to find any information on which riders had been tested and how often, perhaps you could provide a link to the stats you are quoting.
How do we know Sastre or Contador etc... are not getting tested just as often? Maybe if they mentioned it on twitter it would be true.