Poll

Apparently there'a vacancy, I'd vote for Andy Wilkinson, but my opinion is not to be trusted.

Lance Armstrong
28 (40.6%)
US Postal/ Discovery
2 (2.9%)
Someone else on drugs.
13 (18.8%)
Anyone you felt never got a fair crack of the whip
10 (14.5%)
Jens Voigt
16 (23.2%)

Total Members Voted: 57

Author Topic: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005  (Read 7588 times)

spesh

  • It's starting to look a lot like Cthulhumas!
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #75 on: September 05, 2012, 01:33:34 pm »
Seriously - UCI should take a leaf out of FIFA's book (!!! :o) by picking less obvious places to run their most prestigious events. The Middle East is an obvious area, since they have money, but also Russia, China, South and South-East Asia, all have potential, as does Latin America.

The award of the 2022 World Cup to Qatar is a symptom of Fifa's corruption - it's an entirely unsuitable location for a football tournament and they only got it because the people who run the game stand to make a handsome personal profit from it.

Fifa is not a good example for the UCI to follow.

d.

I'd say the UCI have been following the FIA model - hints of MaXXX Mosley-style management, Ferrari's International Assistance and Eccle$$$tone's money-grubbing.  ;) :demon: ;)
"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you." ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

citoyen

  • Cat 6 Racer
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #76 on: September 05, 2012, 02:23:45 pm »
UCI, FIFA, FIA, IOC, IRB... can anyone name a major international sporting governing body that's not rotten to the core?

d.

Cudzoziemiec

  • Dormant but requires tea
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #77 on: September 05, 2012, 02:57:54 pm »
I reckon there's a business opportunity in the 1999 to 2005 title vacuum. They can re-run the races as a 'Masters' series , allowing anyone who rode the originals to compete, as long as they are now 'clean'. They could run them in February in the Southern Hemisphere, as a way of extending the ASO brand.
I did also wonder if the courses could be modelled on some of the longer Tours, such as the 1926. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1926_Tour_de_France
Maybe the riders could ride period bikes as well.
If it catches on they could disqualify other 'dubious' winners to allow more events to be run.
Seriously - UCI should take a leaf out of FIFA's book (!!! :o) by picking less obvious places to run their most prestigious events. The Middle East is an obvious area, since they have money, but also Russia, China, South and South-East Asia, all have potential, as does Latin America.

The World Cup can be held anywhere but bike road races can't, eg Milan-San Remo has to start in Milan and end in San Remo and needless to say the Tour de France has be be held in France.

They can have new races but they'll never have the 100 year histories of the most prestigious races. The only event that can move around from year to year is the worlds.
And the Worlds doesn't mean much to the general public. The only bike races with any prestige to those not (yet) interested would be the Olympics, "le Tour" and perhaps their own national tour - therefore it would make sense to promote more national tours and invest in national teams in countries where they might be some interest, but not much has been achieved so far.
At some point in the ride, you might find yourself in Osaka with Spanish speakers where you had expected Edinburgh talking Greek. This does not mean you are lost, or even off route.

Cudzoziemiec

  • Dormant but requires tea
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #78 on: September 05, 2012, 03:10:35 pm »
Seriously - UCI should take a leaf out of FIFA's book (!!! :o) by picking less obvious places to run their most prestigious events. The Middle East is an obvious area, since they have money, but also Russia, China, South and South-East Asia, all have potential, as does Latin America.

The award of the 2022 World Cup to Qatar is a symptom of Fifa's corruption - it's an entirely unsuitable location for a football tournament and they only got it because the people who run the game stand to make a handsome personal profit from it.

Fifa is not a good example for the UCI to follow.

d.
Entirely true about Qatar. But Russia in 2018, while also certainly being corrupt, is different, in that it's a country with a tradition of football but never having achieved much at national level. In Qatar (I'm presuming) there isn't much/any tradition or culture of football (or cycling) and so dumping a prestigious international tournament in the country is going to do very little to increase numbers participating in the sport. You'd have to put the effort into developing a local league, clubs, etc.
At some point in the ride, you might find yourself in Osaka with Spanish speakers where you had expected Edinburgh talking Greek. This does not mean you are lost, or even off route.

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #79 on: September 05, 2012, 03:29:02 pm »
Back to the original question, I suspect most people would vote for "no one" but it's not one of the choices.

citoyen

  • Cat 6 Racer
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #80 on: September 05, 2012, 03:43:03 pm »
You know, I don't see why the Tour de France couldn't be held in a different country - after all, the Paris-Dakar Rally (run by the same organisation) is held in South America these days.

d.

Cudzoziemiec

  • Dormant but requires tea
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #81 on: September 05, 2012, 03:57:49 pm »
I wasn't aware of that, so I checked it out. It's "The Dakar" now and, yes, it's in South America. "Dakar is your lifestyle" and usual marketing bullshit, see here. As the Tour of France is already Le Tour, it's on the way.

Le Tour by Rapha, supported by Colnago and Trek with the aid of Shimano and Glaxo. One of the foremost sporting endurance endeavours of our time - 3,000 kilometres, 150 riders, 1 winner, One Tour. Grand Depart, Kinshasa, 1st July 2013.
At some point in the ride, you might find yourself in Osaka with Spanish speakers where you had expected Edinburgh talking Greek. This does not mean you are lost, or even off route.

RJ

  • Droll rat
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #82 on: September 05, 2012, 04:02:21 pm »
You know, I don't see why the Tour de France couldn't be held in a different country - after all, the Paris-Dakar Rally (run by the same organisation) is held in South America these days.

d.

I bet the Senegalese are hacked off ...

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #83 on: November 06, 2012, 09:37:26 am »
It's still Lance for me. This from a cycling website has reinforced my view.

Quote
Noted cycling pundits around the world were reeling from the shock of their cash cows continuing to disappear from the cycling landscape, like cows being sucked off the range by bloodthirsty aliens. A gobsmacked Ned Boulting managed to eke out a few words:
 
“My world has changed. Journalists are breaking the omertá. People are picking on me and ITV on Twitter. I just don’t know what to do any more. I want the Armstrong era back. At least that period was predictable and safe for us to profit from mass-produced cycling fiction on a large scale. Now? I actually have to work for a living. It’s a stunning turn of events,” stated Boulting.

My relationship to the Tour de France is via a chain, I watch ITV4, they pay ASO for the rights, and ASO pay the winners. The teams are paid by sponsors to get their names on screen, there are adverts in between. The more people watch, the better the process works. The web chattering classes looking for their moment in the Sun are a big turnoff for me. Kimmage I can take, at least he rode in the Tour. Those who seem to want to be a combination of Hunter S Thompson and Senator McCarthy I can choose to ignore by choosing Lance as my winner from 1999 to 2005. And I like Phil Ligget and the rest of the gang.

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #84 on: November 06, 2012, 09:48:00 am »
Well, you might wish it were, but you're just plain wrong.
Getting there...

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #85 on: November 06, 2012, 10:09:32 am »
Well, you might wish it were, but you're just plain wrong.

I can live with your disapprobation. If people want to lower the status of the Tour to 'I'm a Celebrity' on steroids, then I can still root for who I want to be 'King of the Jungle'. At some point they bring the event into so much disrepute that the significance of winning it becomes so devalued as to reappear at the other side, with Lance still taking the least time.

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #86 on: November 06, 2012, 10:22:15 am »
I'm full of more (prescription) drugs than I'd like at the moment, so it might have been me.

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #87 on: November 06, 2012, 10:28:09 am »
ESL, you are so devaluing it.  Feel free to select your Sleb of choice.  In fact, if you're not happy with any of the other Grand Tour Results, you can play a virtual game with that, too.  Up to you, really.  But, in the real world, you are wrong.  Clearly that never bothers you.
Getting there...

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #88 on: November 06, 2012, 10:49:37 am »
People seem to be labouring under a category error. I was reminded of this when Lance's effigy was burnt. They originally burned the Pope, but that got controversial. Some seem to believe that the Tour is a way of electing the Pope of cycle sport, a man of shining integrity. It's not that, it's a business proposition dreamt up to sell papers with a murky history. There's a collision between the anti-commercial zealots of the net and the reality of the Tour. If those anti-commercialists want to find their own Pope of cycle sport then let them look among the amateur ranks, there are plenty of real heroes to choose from, rather than accepting the verdict of the Tour and feeling cheated a decade or more later.

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #89 on: November 06, 2012, 11:30:32 am »
But the people who run the Tour say that there is no winner for those years, so you have the misconception.
Getting there...

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #90 on: November 06, 2012, 11:54:07 am »
I don't believe in God, but I look round churches, mouth the Lord's Prayer and see more than my fair share of choral masses. Others have to believe in a physical God who will redeem them. Those in the 'cancer community' saw redemption in Lance's victories. I got annoyed with the connection of the Tour with illness and redemption. To me he was just another flawed character dominating the Tour, an interesting study in what it takes to win.
I'm more interested in the Tour as a process than in the 'winner'. There's nothing to seperate Lance from any of the other winners of the period, other than his fall from grace, the power of which depends on how much belief you had in him. To me he's as much the winner as those in the years surrounding him. But I don't need a winner in the same way that many others do, victory goes to the nastiest in most instances. Some seek to validate their selfishness through role models like Lance, others would prefer to promote a purer model of behaviour to first place.

citoyen

  • Cat 6 Racer
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #91 on: November 06, 2012, 11:55:36 am »
Le Tour by Rapha, supported by Colnago and Trek with the aid of Shimano and Glaxo. One of the foremost sporting endurance endeavours of our time - 3,000 kilometres, 150 riders, 1 winner, One Tour. Grand Depart, Kinshasa, 1st July 2013.

 ;D

d.

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #92 on: November 06, 2012, 12:09:43 pm »
I'm more interested in the Tour as a process than in the 'winner'.
..
But I don't need a winner in the same way that many others do.

Seems a reasonable thing to do to start a thready saying "Who won the Tour de France"


mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #93 on: November 06, 2012, 12:15:08 pm »
I'm more interested in the Tour as a process than in the 'winner'.
..
But I don't need a winner in the same way that many others do.

Seems a reasonable thing to do to start a thready saying "Who won the Tour de France"

I don't believe it's certain who started this thread.
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

fuzzy (retd.) AAGE

  • SWMBO's Toy Boy.
  • Apprentice Leathery Old Git
    • The Secret Cyclist blog
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #94 on: November 06, 2012, 12:47:57 pm »
I voted Lance.

Lance won the TdF between 1999 and 2005 as he finished the event with the shortest cumulative time.

The fact that he did it doped to the eyeballs doesn't take away the fact that he was 'first' accross the line. He won. As a cheat.

The fact that he won the TdF between 199 and 2005 doped to the eyeballs means that his right to shout from the rooftops that he is a 7 times TdF winner has been taken away from him. He should be punished by financial penalty too.

Where do we go from here?

My take is that what went before stays in the past and a line is drawn over it. Activity below that line shoud still occur in that evidence of cheating should be sought and actioned when it becomes available. What happens above the line is that the governing body/ bodies should be challenged and forced to get their shit together. Regulations should be drawn up that instigate the long term storeage of samples for retrospective testing (this should overcome the issue of PED's being developed that can't yet be tested for) with positive tests being dealt with by lengthy (lifetime?) bans. Appeals will be allowed with the costs of succesful appeals being met by the relevant governing body so that legitimate positives do not adversely punish the athlete.

David Millar to ruke the world?
Quote from: tatanab
The mark of a true cyclist - prepared to try anything on offer

If it ain't bad for you it ain't worth doing