Lance singing it...:lol:
http://vimeo.com/58191312#
#

Brilliant.

Lance had the audacity to sue people for making false statements that were clearly true. I find it appalling that people will still go to great lengths to defend his character. He deserves to be brought to bankruptcy.

nice. well done.

Armstrong. the best there ever was.

and isn't is Landis who actually started a Foundation in 2006 to raise money for his legal team to fight doping allegations? now in an effort to avoid a federal criminal suit, he's agreed to repay all the $$ he raised. Well, he can't do that. He's bankrupt. So what's the plan??? File a federal whistle blower suit and name Armstrong as a part owner of the Postal Service team and hope to get a percentage of what that suit settles for.


there are some peope lower than Armstrong. This A-Hole is one of them.

Pretty funny... but he does makes a better cyclist than a singer.

Nope. That would be Eddy. Look him up.

really? how many TdF's did that guy win?

He won 5. Compare that to the guy you said is the best ever - who has won zero.

Ummm, guys, do we have to review the fact that Eddy was an admitted doper? He just hasn't had the USADA come after him post retirement. Nor, will he, as a Belgian, who isn't considering international Tri's, and all that.

He won every major grand tour at least twice.

Hinault won 5 also, and other than vague rumors and the usual "everyone was doping so he must have been too" logic, nothing has ever stuck. LeMond backs him on riding clean while they were teammates on La Vie Claire. And he had no great love for the Badger after 1986.

No one really believes that Indurain won his 5 clean, on the other hand.

There are, I'm sure, a lot of lying asses in this story. The Andreu's whine about how they've been wronged, but for Betsy being called a few foul names, there doesn't seem to be much of a claim. Furthermore, Frankie Andreu and his wife, in interview after interview year after year, had maintained that Frankie's foray into doping began in 1999 and only for a "couple of races," in order to help Lance win the TDF. Of course, under oath, Frankie said he really began doping in 1996, and doped during the 1998 TDF; Lance didn't ride in the 1998 TDF.

I wish I were an orangutan so I could give that masterpiece FOUR enthusiastic thumbs up.

Setting aside doping issues, there is no serious argument that Armstrong holds a candle to Merckx.

To address your specific question, Merckx won 5 tours. However you have to realize that the TDF while the most important race on the calender, was not the overwhelmingly dominant focus of the cycling world as it is today. Merckx could have won more TDFs had he chose to. One year, he did not even ride the TDF, choosing instead to accomplish the Giro, Vuelta double, and he might have won another TDF had he not been punched by a spectator.

Then you get to how Merckx dominated the TDF. Merckx holds the record for most days in Yellow, Most stage wins, most multiple jerseys. Armstrong is well down in all those categories. And Merckx is the only rider to ever win all the jerseys in one TDF. So looking at just the TDF, it's a draw; Armstrong with 2 more wins, Merckx with more impressive overall performances.

Then beyond the TDF, there is simply no comparison. Grand Tours go 11 to 7 for Merckx. Classics wins go 28 to 1 for Merckx. Hour record, 1-0 for Merckx. Monuments wins go 19-0 to Merckx. World Championship Road Race 3-2 Merckx. Super Prestige Pernod or UCI Pro Tour championships 7-0 Merckx. 525 Pro victories for Merckx, compared to a relative handful for Armstrong outsied the TDF.

There is simply no credible argument that Armstrong begins to comapre to Merckx, unless you take such a myopic view of Pro Cycling that nothing beyond the TDF matters.

I also remember Lance being asked if he was the greatest cyclist of all time and he laughed and asked the reporter if they had ever heard of Eddy Merckx

http://www.calamarichris.com/smiley/laugh.gif You give Lance partisans far too much credit.

I would be interested to read an interview in which Frankie says his 'foray into doping began in 1999...'. So far as I have ever seen, he has always (since his original admittance) been consistent regarding his doping past.

How about a survey:

A. rangerdavid was seriously questioning Merckx' credentials.

B. everybody who responded to him is dense.

I vote Lemond. I think there are some obvious similarities between them., they both had near death comebacks against all odds, Lemond showed vulnerability and perhaps some humility at least at times in his triumphs. Despite everything, Armstrong was a capable athlete. Mercx seems to have a cult of personality beyond his actual exploits, the number of his opposition who could have also ridden a +50km hour record seems to be zero. So in a sense he had weaker opposition than guys who came later at those levels of ability. Winning and dominating is not actually a quantitative measure of ability like power output,vo2 max etc, if he was born 20 years later with the exact same abilities I dont think he would have done quite as well, there would have been too much opposition, but would still have been up there.

What's "C"?

C. canam73 is not good at designing surveys.

Only 2 riders have ever won all 3, and Eddy's the only one with multiple wins in each.

Case closed.

Which means, he's still the best doper there has ever been.

+1
Travis Tygart told Scott P. on 60 Minutes that Lance lied when he said that during his 7 tour WINS that doping was as common as water in the bottle air in the tires and then dope. If Travis is right and L is wrong, how many that stood on the potium with L at all 7 tours have NOT addmitted doping or tested positive.