What CyclovaXC Thinks about Lance Armstrong!

You know, this is actually kind of an irresponsible post on my part because there's a lot of CyclovaXC business that needs to be delt with, but I've been looking for a forum to express myself on this issue for a long time, and now that I see we have 10s of subscribers, I understand that the time has come!

There has been a lot of debate as to how Lance should be classified in terms of other great cyclists. Currently, people in the industry have seemed to settle on calling him "The Best Tour Rider." This is because Lance certainly has the resume to warrant the word "best" in whatever title he is granted, but because of the continued love fest for Eddy Merckx (and because, let's face it, Lance has a bit of a difficult peronality), nobody in the bike industry is willing to say he is the "Best Cyclist Ever," so they've settled on this kind of wishy washy consolation prize of "Best Tour Rider" in order to not annoy anybody.

Well, I don't know who they're trying to NOT annoy with that ridiculous title, but they have certainly SUCCEEDED in annoying ME for one and I can't belive that I'm alone in this.

Let's put the record straight.

Not only is Lance Armstrong the greatest cyclist in history. He's the greatest athlete to ever compete in any sport ever. There's simply NOBODY who's come even CLOSE to dominating their sport so completely and over such a length of time as Lance Armstrong.

Case closed.

Print it.

And this debate would be infiltrating other media sources if those involved in the American Bicycle media industry would stop bowing to the impressions of Europeans and just tell it like it is.

Lance is the Greatest! It's not even close.

How did I arrive at my conclusion? A simple assessment of the facts. People in Merckx's corner like to point out the sheer number of races that Eddy won (it was something like 1/3 of the races he even entered...which is impressive), his 5 tour victories (also impressive), 5 giro victories (impressive), and the fact that he won every major jersey on the tour one year (Overall, sprinter, mountain in 1969).

Lance didn't do all that. What DID Lance do? he won the tour 7 times. Sure, a couple Giro's would have been nice in there, but let's face it. The Giro de Italia is an inferior race. The Tour de Trump was an inferior race too. Lance didn't focus on inferior races, he focused on the crown jewel, the TDF! And he WON it!

And for me, this is the crux of the argument, the sealing point: Lance didn't TRY to win every single race on the schedule like Merckx, but Merckx DID try to win 6 tours...and FAILED!

Let me say it again.

Lance did something that Merckx failed to do.
Lance did something that Indurain failed to do.
Lance did something that Hinault failed to do.
Lance did something that Anquetil failed to do.
He won SIX Tours, then he did it again and won SEVEN!

To me, that's the difference, he succeeded where the others failed, and for that reason, he should be labeled as the greatest.

And look, buddies, it's going to have to be US here in the USA that champion him because they certainly aren't going to print any magazines in FRANCE with the title "Lance Armstrong Greatest Cyclist Ever."

Feel free to disagree with me and submit an article arguing why I'm wrong (controversy is rule number one in all kinds of publishing) but please DON'T use that wishy-washy "best tour cyclist ever" phrase around me, that's just a disguised way of saying that Armstrong is in second place and if there's one thing I know about that guy, it's that he doesn't like second place...in fact, he finds it insulting (I'm not sure how he feels about third place either, I guess we'll find out next year).


Subscribe to CyclovaXC by Email



No comments:

Post a Comment