Professional Cycling For the Fans - Why Hasn't Armstrong won all the Big Threes?

In other sports, it's a huge honor to win all the major crowns. Few athletes would be considered all time greats unless they did just that. Look at Roger Federrer for example.

Would winning 8 TDFs be bigger than winning 7 TDFs and a Giro?

In other sports, it's a huge honor to win all the major crowns. Few athletes would be considered all time greats unless they did just that. Look at Roger Federrer for example.

Would winning 8 TDFs be bigger than winning 7 TDFs and a Giro?

the only time lanced raced the vuelta as i recall is when he first came back from cancer, and he did very well. the only time lance raced the giro is when he came back from retirement and he did pretty well.

during his TDF run lance didn't contest either race frankly because i believe he thought they were beneath him.

ed rader

Lance never really raced in the others.

Probably a combination of being a TDF specific rider and that is really what he wants to do.

I wouldn't consider Pete Sampras any less of a tennis player because he only really won Wimbledon and the US Open.

At his prime he probably could have won them, but he chose to focus on the TdF only.

A lot of it depends. If you're an Italian, the Giro may be the race you try hardest to win during the season. Generally though, the Tour de France gets much greater publicity, and is generally viewed as the most prestigious race there is.

As has already been pointed out. He never tried. So, we'll never know if he could have, or not. 8 tours would definately be a bigger number for anyone to attempt in that one race than 7 tdfs and a Giro. However, the realative merit or difficulty of each tour varies from year to year. Some would argue that a string of Giro wins would be a bigger accomplishment. But, that's not how the guy decided to define himself. He's concentrated of TDF wins and has done that better than any other cyclist in history. I'll even go as far as to say that he hasn't always been the "strongest" rider in a number of those victories. What he has consistantly been, is the most calculating, prepared, team protected and controlling rider the peleton has ever known. There's more than one way to win grand tours and Lance has all but perfected what he has called the "formual" or "pattern" for winning the Tour De France. Next year is going to be interesting, when Alberto and Andy, with all their talent and climbing strength come up against Armstrong and his "formula". With his own team, built around select riders that arent' poodles to a government sponsor and no disagreement or breaks with regard to tactics, it'll be interesting to see if youth and enthusiasm can overcome a "JB/LA Train".

As has already been pointed out. He never tried. So, we'll never know if he could have, or not. 8 tours would definately be a bigger number for anyone to attempt in that one race than 7 tdfs and a Giro. However, the realative merit or difficulty of each tour varies from year to year. Some would argue that a string of Giro wins would be a bigger accomplishment. But, that's not how the guy decided to define himself. He's concentrated of TDF wins and has done that better than any other cyclist in history. I'll even go as far as to say that he hasn't always been the "strongest" rider in a number of those victories. What he has consistantly been, is the most calculating, prepared, team protected and controlling rider the peleton has ever known. There's more than one way to win grand tours and Lance has all but perfected what he has called the "formual" or "pattern" for winning the Tour De France. Next year is going to be interesting, when Alberto and Andy, with all their talent and climbing strength come up against Armstrong and his "formula". With his own team, built around select riders that arent' poodles to a government sponsor and no disagreement or breaks with regard to tactics, it'll be interesting to see if youth and enthusiasm can overcome a "JB/LA Train".

I really can't think of a stronger all around rider that Armstrong faced in his 7 wins. Ullrich was good, but not on the same level climbing wise and almost always got out TT'd by Armstrong.

I think Contador is too much for anyone at this point. I think Andy can be beaten unless he improves his TT results.

As has already been pointed out. He never tried. So, we'll never know if he could have, or not. 8 tours would definately be a bigger number for anyone to attempt in that one race than 7 tdfs and a Giro. However, the realative merit or difficulty of each tour varies from year to year. Some would argue that a string of Giro wins would be a bigger accomplishment. But, that's not how the guy decided to define himself. He's concentrated of TDF wins and has done that better than any other cyclist in history. I'll even go as far as to say that he hasn't always been the "strongest" rider in a number of those victories. What he has consistantly been, is the most calculating, prepared, team protected and controlling rider the peleton has ever known. There's more than one way to win grand tours and Lance has all but perfected what he has called the "formual" or "pattern" for winning the Tour De France. Next year is going to be interesting, when Alberto and Andy, with all their talent and climbing strength come up against Armstrong and his "formula". With his own team, built around select riders that arent' poodles to a government sponsor and no disagreement or breaks with regard to tactics, it'll be interesting to see if youth and enthusiasm can overcome a "JB/LA Train".

it already happened. where were you :roflmao2:?

ed rader

I think Merckx's 5 Giros and 5 TDFs far outshine Lance's 7 TDF wins.

I think Merckx's 5 Giros and 5 TDFs far outshine Lance's 7 TDF wins.

along with all his other wins there's no doubt that merckx was the best ever.

ed rader

As has already been pointed out. He never tried. So, we'll never know if he could have, or not. 8 tours would definately be a bigger number for anyone to attempt in that one race than 7 tdfs and a Giro. However, the realative merit or difficulty of each tour varies from year to year. Some would argue that a string of Giro wins would be a bigger accomplishment. But, that's not how the guy decided to define himself. He's concentrated of TDF wins and has done that better than any other cyclist in history. I'll even go as far as to say that he hasn't always been the "strongest" rider in a number of those victories. What he has consistantly been, is the most calculating, prepared, team protected and controlling rider the peleton has ever known. There's more than one way to win grand tours and Lance has all but perfected what he has called the "formual" or "pattern" for winning the Tour De France. Next year is going to be interesting, when Alberto and Andy, with all their talent and climbing strength come up against Armstrong and his "formula". With his own team, built around select riders that arent' poodles to a government sponsor and no disagreement or breaks with regard to tactics, it'll be interesting to see if youth and enthusiasm can overcome a "JB/LA Train".

it already happened. where were you :roflmao2:?

ed rader

Did you miss the qualifiers in there? Or, do you prefer to post after having only selectively read what you would like to hear instead of what is actually written?

along with all his other wins there's no doubt that merckx was the best ever.

ed rader

Best at more than just GT's. Let's not forget 4x's busted for use of banned substances. A record that Lance doesn't have a chance of ever getting close to.

Best at more than just GT's. Let's not forget 4x's busted for use of banned substances. A record that Lance doesn't have a chance of ever getting close to.

"the glove doesn't fit so you must acquit".

ed rader

In other sports, it's a huge honor to win all the major crowns. Few athletes would be considered all time greats unless they did just that. Look at Roger Federrer for example.

Would winning 8 TDFs be bigger than winning 7 TDFs and a Giro?

As has been mentioned, Lance hasn't one the other because he really hasn't raced them. Only the first time for him in the Giro this year. And the Vuelta at the beginning of his career.

I view Lance as the greatest TdF rider. 7 wins. However, not the greatest racer of all time. For me you have to win other big races. Lance pretty much just specialized at the TdF. Its very difficult to try and win multiple grand tours in one season. Especially the Giro and the TdF. Or the TdF and the Vuelta. Or the spring classics. Why? Because they are relatively close together. Its tough to be riding at your peak at different times in the season.

If you take away the TdF wins, Lance doesn't have a lot of other major wins. He's got a World Championship going back to 1993. Again, before he was specializing at the TdF. Lance had a stretch where he seriously focused only on the TdF. But didn't compete in any other major races.

Take Indurain for example. 5 TdF's, 2 Giros. His Giro wins were in years that he also won the TdF. Olympic and World TT championships (the world in a year that he won a TdF).

And this before we even get into Eddy Merckx.

In other sports, it's a huge honor to win all the major crowns. Few athletes would be considered all time greats unless they did just that. Look at Roger Federrer for example.

Would winning 8 TDFs be bigger than winning 7 TDFs and a Giro?

The analogy doesn't quite work, at least in this era for a couple of reasons.

1) In Tennis, Wimbledon and the US Open are essentially equal in terms of prestige, fields,fan, and media attention. In Cycling, the TDF is on another plane above the Giro, and arguably 2 steps ahead of the Vuelta.

2) In an era of specialization, it's extremely difficult to win 2 Grand Tours in the same year, particularly the Giro and the Tour. ( A Giro, Vuelta double is a bit easier due to less competition, and more time for recovery.)

It would be a closer, but not perfect, analogy to compare Armstrong not winning the Giro, to McEnroe not winning the Australian Open.

He focused entirely on the Tdf, which arguably was the biggest of the 3 GTs.

along with all his other wins there's no doubt that merckx was the best ever.

ed rader

In all fairness, LA even refers to EM as the "greatest of all time." Every time there is a mention or picture of him on his twitter account he refers to him as such. I actually believe that's one of the few times he's probably not using thinly-veiled modesty (a la his recent "But I'm no legend" comment). I could be wrong, of course . . .

In all fairness, LA even refers to EM as the "greatest of all time." Every time there is a mention or picture of him on his twitter account he refers to him as such. I actually believe that's one of the few times he's probably not using thinly-veiled modesty (a la his recent "But I'm no legend" comment). I could be wrong, of course . . .

True. Merckx is the greatest cyclist. LA, on the other hand, is the most famous. He's fine with that.

Even Versus, with their lips surgically attached to Armstrong's butt, have taken to calling Armstrong "the Greastest Tour De France Rider of all time" as oppossed to greatest cyclist ever.

The analogy doesn't quite work, at least in this era for a couple of reasons.

1) In Tennis, Wimbledon and the US Open are essentially equal in terms of prestige, fields,fan, and media attention. In Cycling, the TDF is on another plane above the Giro, and arguably 2 steps ahead of the Vuelta.

2) In an era of specialization, it's extremely difficult to win 2 Grand Tours in the same year, particularly the Giro and the Tour. ( A Giro, Vuelta double is a bit easier due to less competition, and more time for recovery.)

It would be a closer, but not perfect, analogy to compare Armstrong not winning the Giro, to McEnroe not winning the Australian Open.

Sorry, that does not fly. Or perhaps I should say it only flies because there was a 7 year gap when a top Tour rider was focusing on the TDF. Two tours was done last year, the TDF Giro was done in '98. A double was never common. Before 1949 it was thought impossible.

Speaking of '49 Coppi deserves some mention. He is the only one that one can make a decent case for as greatest of all time besides Eddy. (I'm not saying Coppi was better, simply that the argument can be made, and that in cycling terms Coppi and Hinault are the only ones even on Eddy's wheel).

Go check were the guy who won the Giro finished the Tour. Lance wanted the Tour, very few can do both, especially these days with such targeted training programs.

In other sports, it's a huge honor to win all the major crowns. Few athletes would be considered all time greats unless they did just that. Look at Roger Federrer for example.

Would winning 8 TDFs be bigger than winning 7 TDFs and a Giro?

Not in the US. Heck I'd bet a TDF win in the US would be sinsidered a greater feat than winning the 5 monuments and the Worlds all in hte same year.

And that puts Lance's concentration on the TDF into focus. He is American and his sponsors have until this year been American. He focused on what was going to pay off for him and his sponsors. I've always thought he was pretty up front about this and think he has done what he set out to do. No problems until people start making it into more than it is.

Go check were the guy who won the Giro finished the Tour. Lance wanted the Tour, very few can do both, especially these days with such targeted training programs.

indurain won the tour and the giro twice in consecutive years. pantani also won the tour and giro in the same year. armstrong raced with both of those guys.

ed rader

Armstrong realized that the TdF alone could win celebrity recognition, with its glamor and prestige. He went all out for it.

The Tour De France overshadows every other cycling event, so it was a smart move for Lance to concentrate on the TDF. The tennis analogy is close, but the TDF is far more important to cycling, than say Wimbledon is to Tennis, or the Masters is to golf.

http://www.google.com/trends?q=giro%2C+tour+de+france%2C+vuelta&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&sort=1

The Tour De France overshadows every other cycling event, so it was a smart move for Lance to concentrate on the TDF. The tennis analogy is close, but the TDF is far more important to cycling, than say Wimbledon is to Tennis, or the Masters is to golf.

http://www.google.com/trends?q=giro%2C+tour+de+france%2C+vuelta&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&sort=1

like i said indurain won the tour and giro in the same year. twice. i.e., he did not forgo the TDF to win the giro. he won both, twice, in consecutive years. pantani did too.

ed rader

like i said indurain won the tour and giro in the same year. twice. i.e., he did not forgo the TDF to win the giro. he won both, twice, in consecutive years. pantani did too.

ed rader

So why is Contador avoiding the Vuelta?

like i said indurain won the tour and giro in the same year. twice. i.e., he did not forgo the TDF to win the giro. he won both, twice, in consecutive years. pantani did too.

ed rader

As did Hinault, in 85 and 82, and the Tour and Vuelta in 78.

So why is Contador avoiding the Vuelta?

contador already won the vuelta.

ed rader

contador already won the vuelta.

ed rader

So I guess he will be skipping the TDF next year? :lol:

LOGIC FAIL

I think Merckx's 5 Giros and 5 TDFs far outshine Lance's 7 TDF wins.

Merckx's 11 total Grand Tour wins is impressive. But his total of 20 Major Jerseys (GC, KOM and Points) out of 14 Grand Tour entries is almost unbelievable.

So why is Contador avoiding the Vuelta?

Perhaps he is not the one making the call.

So I guess he will be skipping the TDF next year? :lol:

LOGIC FAIL

i would give you a deeper explanation but i suspect it would be a waste of air.

ed rader

It may be that LA knew he wasn't capable of a Giro/TDF double. So why try?

Perhaps he is not the one making the call.

i'm trying to think of the last TDF champ who contested the vuelta in the same year. i know when indurain lost the TDF to riis banesto wanted him to ride the vuelta and indurain got mad and quit....tho i think he was gone anyway :thumb:.

ed rader

contador already won the vuelta.

ed rader

Huh?

Why not add to his legacy?

Huh?

Why not add to his legacy?

I don't think its because he doesn't necessarily want to ride in it. There is this whole Astana team situation that is up in the air. You might have heard something about a team controversy with Astana during the TdF. :rolleyes: He's rode more that one grand tour before in a season and won.

I haven't seen anything the definitively says he's not riding it. The Vuelta rosters aren't completely set as of yet. But it would be hard to see him in with Astana again this season.

And I believe the original question was why hasn't Armstrong won all the Big Threes? Not why isn't Contador racing this year's Vuelta. AC has won all three grand tours already. That is quite a legacy.

I think Contador wants a break from Astana.

I don't think its because he doesn't necessarily want to ride in it. There is this whole Astana team situation that is up in the air. You might have heard something about a team controversy with Astana during the TdF. :rolleyes: He's rode more that one grand tour before in a season and won.

I haven't seen anything the definitively says he's not riding it. The Vuelta rosters aren't completely set as of yet. But it would be hard to see him in with Astana again this season.

And I believe the original question was why hasn't Armstrong won all the Big Threes? Not why isn't Contador racing this year's Vuelta. AC has won all three grand tours already. That is quite a legacy.

Well when he does a TDF and a Giro and or a Vuelta in one year, then I will give him props.

Ferrari's clients have usually only one time of the year that they ride well. It's all part of the program. In fact, it would be too difficult to be a rider that races year round under such a program requiring such a buildup and peak cycle.

Well when he does a TDF and a Giro and or a Vuelta in one year, then I will give him props.

So no props for Lance for never even winning a Giro or Vuelta? Let alone winning both in the same year or a TdF and Giro/Vuelta. Seems like you've got differents standards for handing out your props.

Anyways, the OP's question wasn't regarding Cantador winning all of the grand tours. It was why Lance had not. Funny how you dodge the question at hand but still try to bust on AC, the guy who has won all three already at the age of 26.

So no props for Lance for never even winning a Giro or Vuelta? Let alone winning both in the same year or a TdF and Giro/Vuelta. Seems like you've got differents standards for handing out your props.

Anyways, the OP's question wasn't regarding Cantador winning all of the grand tours. It was why Lance had not. Funny how you dodge the question at hand but still try to bust on AC, the guy who has won all three already at the age of 26.

The reason that Contador won two in one year is cause he didn't race the TDF. Armstrong concentrated on the TDF. What question am I dodging? I think a Giro, Velta dual is easier than a Giro TDF or a TDF then Vuelta. You have more time to recover. Not that any two in the same year is easy.

The reason that Contador won two in one year is cause he didn't race the TDF. Armstrong concentrated on the TDF. What question am I dodging? I think a Giro, Velta dual is easier than a Giro TDF or a TDF then Vuelta. You have more time to recover. Not that any two in the same year is easy.

True enough. However, you mentioned that you would give props to AC if he won the TdF plus Giro or Vuelta in the same year. This is something that Lance never attempted. Why do you think that is? Obviously, that is a very difficult task to take on. There isn't much time to recover with the TdF sandwiched in there. However, from a legacy standpoint, why do you think Lance never attempted it? He's widely acknowledged as the greatest TdF rider. But adding the other grand tours would have put himself in the Eddy Merckx category.

I'm not trying to bust on you, Julian. But you seem to be a staunch Lance supporter. Just curious as to what you might think as to why Lance never tried. He certainly seemed ambitious enough.

True enough. However, you mentioned that you would give props to AC if he won the TdF plus Giro or Vuelta in the same year. This is something that Lance never attempted. Why do you think that is? Obviously, that is a very difficult task to take on. There isn't much time to recover with the TdF sandwiched in there. However, from a legacy standpoint, why do you think Lance never attempted it? He's widely acknowledged as the greatest TdF rider. But adding the other grand tours would have put himself in the Eddy Merckx category.

I'm not trying to bust on you, Julian. But you seem to be a staunch Lance supporter. Just curious as to what you might think as to why Lance never tried. He certainly seemed ambitious enough.

I am not a staunch Lance supporter. I just like to tweak the Lance haters out there. I think his training regimen was set up strictly for TDF victories. I think with the TDF you have too little time to peak for that and the Giro or the Vuelta. The Giro is a tough race and to win that and the TDF is a tall order.
Because Contador was not allowed to race the year he doubled, he was able to concentrate on those two rides with ample time to recover in between.
Perhaps if Armstrong was not able to compete in the TDF, he could have done the same thing. Still even if he would have won even one of those, I don't think that would have put him in the Eddy Merckx category. Do you?

I am not a staunch Lance supporter. I just like to tweak the Lance haters out there. I think his training regimen was set up strictly for TDF victories. I think with the TDF you have too little time to peak for that and the Giro or the Vuelta. The Giro is a tough race and to win that and the TDF is a tall order.
Because Contador was not allowed to race the year he doubled, he was able to concentrate on those two rides with ample time to recover in between.
Perhaps if Armstrong was not able to compete in the TDF, he could have done the same thing. Still even if he would have won even one of those, I don't think that would have put him in the Eddy Merckx category. Do you?

Not unless he had won several of them, to be in EM league. But Lance never even tried. I was surprised to hear that this was the first time he rode the Giro this year. It just seems like he would at least attempted it. And he never attempted the Vuelta during that stretch.

You're right about him training specifically for the TdF. I just wonder why he never tried to do a double. Indurain won the Giro/TdF twice in back to back years. Seems like Lance would have tried it just to prove that he was in his class. If you remove his TdF wins, Lance had rather unremarkable career. To me, even with the 7 wins, it just seems like there should have been more.

Bellwetherman,

What constructive outcome do you hope to result from this post? Is there anything to this post beyond attempting to force a member to defend himself?


Sorry about that. I was just sick of that guy continually attacking me in other posts and then hounding the other guy for holding an opposite opinion. I stepped out of bounds. May the road rise to meet you.

This past year was his first attempt at The Giro, as I recall.Thanks to Astana. I agree, their pink jersey is too creepy. Give it to the Italians... .. He's been very clear all along, the TDF was his thing.

because he hasn't had to. between corporate sponsorship dollars and a winning formula,
armstrong has been able to reduce his racing season. had he started racing a decade earlier
than he did, lance would have been more likely to at least ride 2 of 3 gt's a year. the
endorsement $$$ long ago outstripped his (potential) racing earnings. companies are
more likely to throw money at whomever produces the best result(s) on the biggest
stage-be it the tdf, world cup, olympics or super bowl. not as exciting or profitable
to finish 3rd in the giro, 12th in the vuelta and 1st in the tour of ireland when you can
finish 1st in the tdf-consistently. armstrong could concentrate on peaking his form
only once during the season vs twice (or more) like other riders-definite advantage.
the sponsors jumped on him because he was a great story, was (initially) likeable
and delivered every july. once he and bruyneel perfected their technique/regimen,
his need to ride other races for financial means was negligible.

if, for some reason, there were only one grand tour every year and it rotated between
the tour, giro & vuelta, i have no doubt armstrong would have raced all of them
and won in all 3 countries. as cycling fans, we want to see all the riders in every
race we cherish. for the fans of the classics & one-day races, armstrong didn't focus
on those much after his comeback from cancer and therefore, his completeness
as a rider is questionable. ditto for fans of the vuelta & giro. the racers of yesteryear,
such as kelly, hinault, merckx, anquetil, gimondi, that so many enjoyed rooting for
or against didn't have the huge endorsement $$ and were forced to race as much as
possible for financial reasons. these riders raced pretty much every style, length,
duration and season of race because they had to-armstrong didn't.

because of his competitive nature & ability, i suspect armstrong would have won
his share of classics, one-day races and the occasional stage race had he not had cancer.
his palmares would be more diversified than they already are. if we took away all
his tdf overall wins and sprinkled in 2 paris-roubaix wins, a milan san-remo, 3 assorted
belgian classics, another world championship and a handful of gt stage wins in addition to
what he had before cancer, it would have been a fantastic career. apples & oranges...

While this does not totally answer the question, and many of you were not alive, or paying attention to cycling when guys like Merckx were racing, back then racers rode a lot more because they had to. The pay was a lot worse, even for a star like Merckx. They rode to feed their families. And everyone did that.

For sports that some of you are more familiar with, pitchers used to pitch nine innings...they did not have pitch counts, middle relievers...basketball had forwards and guards...not a power forward, a shooting guard, a point guard...I watched Tom Seaver throw 10 innings in the World Series. You'll never see that today.

Stuff changes.

Lance got paid by his personal sponsors to win the Tour de France. When he won, he got wealthy as most of his money came from personal contracts with bonuses if he won the TdF. Why would he do anything else? Nike, Oakley, Trek, etc. knew that winning the TdF gave everyone the most exposure. Look at this forum...many of you will be gone in a week or two (Probably coinciding with the opeing of NFL training camps and preseason), not to reappear until next July. All the sponsors know this.

Riders rode. They did not have GT riders, classics riders...you were on the team and if you were good enough you raced. L-B-L, Paris Roubaix, Giro, whatever, you rode. The more you rode, the more you made. And teams did not go to exotic places for training camps. They rode in places like Flanders in the winter, and races like Het Volk were for conditioning. Now, it's all out from day one.

It's a different world.

BTW...when Lance was winning Tours, he not only (as dictated by tradition) gave up the winning purse to his teammates, but there was a personal check for each of them from him. It was a big check.

Think Contador did that?

Maybe Lance can't win a TDF if he focuses on anything else. Maybe he needs a strong team built around just him and a year to prepare. I don't know and neither does anyone else because thats how he does it.

I'd like to see the Red Sox focus on the world series and skip all the other useless games like games during the season and post season. I bet they'd win a lot of world series'.