Question from casual fan / cyclist

T-K-O

I was lurking in another thread and some poster mentioned that another or suspect cheat was still a great rider. So I asked the question,

Where does Lance Armstrong rank among the best riders or can this question be answered?

Unfortunately that thread was closed by the MOD's for some other reason before I could get some opinions

Raam

Who?

Beasty

Clearly doesn't "rank" anywhere - cheating means everthing he may think he achieved is completely invalidated. In fact, in my book Raam ranks above Armstrong, because he's actually won something;)

ednwireland

Beasty wrote: »

Clearly doesn't "rank" anywhere - cheating means everthing he may think he achieved is completely invalidated. In fact, in my book Raam ranks above Armstrong, because he's actually won something;)

think lance Armstrong stopped riding after the 1993 world championships didnt he

T-K-O

would that mean we should discount riders or cycling for a certain period?

531

I could, at best, be described as an average A4 rider. I'm not that good at all, but I have won the Tour de France as many times as Lancey Boy.

RobFowl

He won the Worlds once and a Fleche Wallone. Couldn't cut it in the Grand tours though (best result was 36th in the TDF).

Lusk Doyle

How do we know raam and his wins won't end up the same? I mean, it was a fairly remarkable rise but what has he done since then???

Raam

Lusk Doyle wrote: »

How do we know raam and his wins won't end up the same? I mean, it was a fairly remarkable rise but what has he done since then???

4th in B race at Swords CX last year and won the first Swords league hill climb this year :P

snollup

I think OP has raised a very valid question. Down through the years many, if not all of the greats have tested positive at some stage in their carear, our own King Kelly included. Should all of these riders not be viewed through the same eyes as Lance? I'm really starting to think they should. If not, why not?

T-K-O

snollup wrote: »

I think OP has raised a very valid question. Down through the years many, if not all of the greats have tested positive at some stage in their carear, our own King Kelly included. Should all of these riders not be viewed through the same eyes as Lance? I'm really starting to think they should. If not, why not?

I'm beginning to think like that myself. It's a such shame for the sport.

Flandria

snollup wrote: »

I think OP has raised a very valid question. Down through the years many, if not all of the greats have tested positive at some stage in their carear, our own King Kelly included. Should all of these riders not be viewed through the same eyes as Lance? I'm really starting to think they should. If not, why not?

In a word, no. The USADA charges against Pharmstrong included importation, trafficking, and corruption. The SCA case for reimbursement might only be the first of many legal claims against him, ASO want their money back, his sponsors have dropped him like a sack of spuds, and even his Uncle Pat has said there is no place for him in cycling. Anyone that can't or wont see the difference between Kelly getting popped for Stimul and LA's situation really needs to read the USADA reasoned decision again and again until they do...

T-K-O

Also what if ever rider was investigated with the same resources that was used to catch Lance. I would imagine we have a lot more n/a instead of actual winners of the tour and other races.

Brian?

He's head an shoulders above his peers:

Floyd Landis, Marco Pantani, Ricardo Ricco etc.

Nowhere amomg the greats.

happytramp

Even with an ass full of drugs and seven TDF's he wouldn't have got a sniff of the top ten. Probably top 15.

T-K-O

Brian? wrote: »

He's head an shoulders above his peers:

Floyd Landis, Marco Pantani, Ricardo Ricco etc.

Nowhere amomg the greats.

That was my impression.

However as a casual fan, I created the thread looking for some education opnions