Mayo crashes before Pavé

Charlie C.

steve robertson <not.really@texus.net> wrote in
news:9nnue0hcc23t2u8o7bpfi5k9tiskef8sg2@4ax.com:

>
>
> Of course Ullrich waited. The dropped riders (Hamilton was
> not even the first of those to come up) could never have
> caught Ullrich if he had not. Marketing in the United
> States may require that the dropped Hamilton was the hero,
> but that is not the reality.

This is what I don't get.... how do you KNOW that Hamilton
couldn't have cought up? You don't KNOW. You're just
assuming. You have no idea how those guys were feeling, what
strategy they were employing. Just because Tyler caught up,
doesn't automatically mean that Jan waited. Just like Tyler
dropping back doesn't necessarily mean he couldn't get a
second wind and surge ahead. How can you know? Only the
riders can actually know.

Also, there was no "marketing" in the U.S (however, there
was MUCH marketing of the idea that Jan waited - didn't Jan
win some kind of award or something for it?). Just what
Tyler claimed (that Jan didn't wait) and the ONLY reason
Tyler said anything was because so much was being made
about Jan waiting. Tyler obviously didn't think so. He was
there. Were you?

leif_ericson

>This is what I don't get.... how do you KNOW that Hamilton
>couldn't have cought up? You don't KNOW. You're just
>assuming. You have no idea how those guys were feeling, what
>strategy they were employing. Just because Tyler caught up,
>doesn't automatically mean that Jan waited.

It was extremely obvious. A few other riders caught up as well. And you could tell by their motions that they weren't riding hard at all. (you don't suddenly have five riders side by side on a climb like that if they are going all out)

__________________
-Brent

Steve Robertson

On 11 Jul 2004 02:09:04 GMT, "Charlie C."
<charliec1_nospam@excite.com> wrote:

>steve robertson <not.really@texus.net> wrote in
>news:9nnue0hcc23t2u8o7bpfi5k9tiskef8sg2@4ax.com:
>
>>
>>
>> Of course Ullrich waited. The dropped riders (Hamilton
>> was not even the first of those to come up) could never
>> have caught Ullrich if he had not. Marketing in the
>> United States may require that the dropped Hamilton was
>> the hero, but that is not the reality.
>
>This is what I don't get.... how do you KNOW that Hamilton
>couldn't have cought up? You don't KNOW. You're just
>assuming. You have no idea how those guys were feeling,
>what strategy they were employing. Just because Tyler
>caught up, doesn't automatically mean that Jan waited. Just
>like Tyler dropping back doesn't necessarily mean he
>couldn't get a second wind and surge ahead. How can you
>know? Only the riders can actually know.
>
>Also, there was no "marketing" in the U.S (however, there
>was MUCH marketing of the idea that Jan waited - didn't Jan
>win some kind of award or something for it?). Just what
>Tyler claimed (that Jan didn't wait) and the ONLY reason
>Tyler said anything was because so much was being made
>about Jan waiting. Tyler obviously didn't think so. He was
>there. Were you?

You are probably right. Hamilton is the best climber ever,
and he was just waiting a minute behind for the best time to
launch his devastating attack. When he saw the evil Ullrich
attack the fallen hero Lance, Tyler (hence referred to as
"The Amazing Tyler, or TAF) simply rode up to Ullrich and
forced him to slow down based on TAF's amazing force of
personality, and obvious physical superiority.

There was no marketing in the United States at all. All
the books and websites and magazines published in the U.S.
were actually part of a German plot which tried to portray
Ullrich as some sort of god. But even though they were
hugely biased against Armstrong, they unanimously claimed
that Ullrich did not wait, because that is just how
obvious it was.

Sorry, Charlie. I apologise. You are right, Ullrich attacked
but luckily Hamilton was there with his superman cape to set
things right.

I would not try to be ironic. Ever. Geez.

Charlie C.

steve robertson <not.really@texus.net> wrote in
news:u3b1f05nq3vu5f6nd5oh54od0ipbo563r0@4ax.com:

> On 11 Jul 2004 02:09:04 GMT, "Charlie C."
> <charliec1_nospam@excite.com> wrote:
>
>>steve robertson <not.really@texus.net> wrote in
>>news:9nnue0hcc23t2u8o7bpfi5k9tiskef8sg2@4ax.com:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Of course Ullrich waited. The dropped riders (Hamilton
>>> was not even the first of those to come up) could never
>>> have caught Ullrich if he had not. Marketing in the
>>> United States may require that the dropped Hamilton was
>>> the hero, but that is not the reality.
>>
>>This is what I don't get.... how do you KNOW that Hamilton
>>couldn't have cought up? You don't KNOW. You're just
>>assuming. You have no idea how those guys were feeling,
>>what strategy they were employing. Just because Tyler
>>caught up, doesn't automatically mean that Jan waited.
>>Just like Tyler dropping back doesn't necessarily mean he
>>couldn't get a second wind and surge ahead. How can you
>>know? Only the riders can actually know.
>>
>>Also, there was no "marketing" in the U.S (however, there
>>was MUCH marketing of the idea that Jan waited - didn't
>>Jan win some kind of award or something for it?). Just
>>what Tyler claimed (that Jan didn't wait) and the ONLY
>>reason Tyler said anything was because so much was being
>>made about Jan waiting. Tyler obviously didn't think so.
>>He was there. Were you?
>
> There was no marketing in the United States at all. All
> the books and websites and magazines published in the U.S.
> were actually part of a German plot which tried to portray
> Ullrich as some sort of god. But even though they were
> hugely biased against Armstrong, they unanimously claimed
> that Ullrich did not wait, because that is just how
> obvious it was.

Name one publication who's editor claimed that Ullrich did
not wait. Not a publication that repeated what Tyler said
(or what Lance said Tyler said) but one who's editors
claimed it. You can't do it. Where was the "marketing" that
said Jan didn't wait?

Also, Tyler is a pretty good climber. This year's time trial
up Mount Ventoux is an example of that.

You still are simply presenting your interpretation of
events. You havn't proved anything. There is still no
evidence that Jan waited. He might have not attacked but he
didn't wait.

And as for sportsmanship (the original theme of this thread)
was Mayo very sportsmanlike when he let Ullrich pull him up
that mountain and then darted around him to claim the second
place time bonus? How come no one's complaining about that?

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/6521.0.html

Jim Flom

"Charlie C." wrote ...
>
> Name one publication who's editor claimed that Ullrich did
> not wait. Not a publication that repeated what Tyler said
> (or what Lance said Tyler said) but one who's editors
> claimed it. You can't do it.

Can so. CycleSport. Editorial. Phil Liggett. Somewhere
between August and October 2003 editorial.

Ernst Noch

Charlie C. wrote:

> You still are simply presenting your interpretation of
> events. You havn't proved anything. There is still no
> evidence that Jan waited. He might have not attacked but
> he didn't wait.

Tyler got DROPPED! Dammit, is that so hard to understand?
After Lance's crash, he (and a handful of other who had
gotten DROPPED) were able to pass Jan. Do you think he got
himself DROPPED on purpose, in order to employ some secret
tactic involving adrenaline? Or that he just played he got
DROPPED in order to make Jan+Lance+Iban feel more secure on
the last climb?

Whatever. Btw. taking also other incidents where Jan was
involved into account (hint: beloki crash vino), Occam's
razor clearly tells us that Jan waited.

> And as for sportsmanship (the original theme of this
> thread) was Mayo very sportsmanlike when he let Ullrich
> pull him up that mountain and then darted around him to
> claim the second place time bonus? How come no one's
> complaining about that?

Because this was LAST YEAR'S TOUR. Most here prefer to talk
about THE ONGOING TOUR most of the time (or guitar playing
rock ladies, or racers ex-wifes, or - last but not least -
helmets). If you are interested in what happend at LAST
YEAR'S TOUR, just google the group for "Mayo asshole".

have a good day

Ken Papai

"steve robertson" <not.@4ax.com...
> On 11 Jul 2004 02:09:04 GMT, "Charlie C."
> <charliec1_nospam@excite.com> wrote:
>
> >steve robertson <not.really@texus.net> wrote in
> >>
> >> Of course Ullrich waited. The dropped riders (Hamilton
> >> was not even the first of those to come up) could never
> >> have caught Ullrich if he had not. Marketing in the
> >> United States may require that the dropped Hamilton was
> >> the hero, but that is not the reality.
> >
> >This is what I don't get.... how do you KNOW that
> >Hamilton couldn't have cought up? You don't KNOW. You're
> >just assuming. You have no idea how those guys were
> >feeling, what strategy they were employing. Just because
> >Tyler caught up, doesn't automatically mean that Jan
> >waited. Just like Tyler dropping back doesn't necessarily
> >mean he couldn't get a second
wind
> >and surge ahead. How can you know? Only the riders can
> >actually know.
> >
> >Also, there was no "marketing" in the U.S (however, there
> >was MUCH marketing of the idea that Jan waited - didn't
> >Jan win some kind of award or something for it?). Just
> >what Tyler claimed (that Jan didn't wait)
and
> >the ONLY reason Tyler said anything was because so much
> >was being made about Jan waiting. Tyler obviously didn't
> >think so. He was there. Were you?
>
> You are probably right. Hamilton is the best climber ever,
> and he was just waiting a minute behind for the best time
> to launch his devastating attack. When he saw the evil
> Ullrich attack the fallen hero Lance, Tyler (hence
> referred to as "The Amazing Tyler, or TAF) simply rode up
> to Ullrich and forced him to slow down based on TAF's
> amazing force of personality, and obvious physical
> superiority.
>
> There was no marketing in the United States at all. All
> the books and websites and magazines published in the U.S.
> were actually part of a German plot which tried to portray
> Ullrich as some sort of god. But even though they were
> hugely biased against Armstrong, they unanimously claimed
> that Ullrich did not wait, because that is just how
> obvious it was.

Wow Steve, you read different magazines than I do and
interpret stuff bizarrely.
>
> Sorry, Charlie. I apologise. You are right, Ullrich
> attacked but luckily Hamilton was there with his superman
> cape to set things right.

Ullrich just kept riding. He did NOT attack Lance and Mayo.
You read way to much into the incident. My take is that
Lance screwed up riding too closing to the fanatics on side
of the road.

-Ken (thanks for keeping politics out of this, but you did
write "German plot")

Charlie C.

"Jim Flom" <jimflom@telusREMOVE.net> wrote in
news:i8eIc.15139$iw3.10966@clgrps13:

> "Charlie C." wrote ...
>>
>> Name one publication who's editor claimed that Ullrich
>> did not wait. Not a publication that repeated what Tyler
>> said (or what Lance said Tyler said) but one who's
>> editors claimed it. You can't do it.
>
> Can so. CycleSport. Editorial. Phil Liggett. Somewhere
> between August and October 2003 editorial.
>
>

Okay. One. I'll even trust you on it. So that one article is
this overwhelming marketing strategy that Lance employed to
get the word out that Jan attacked when he fell.