Weight Weenies
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/

"PRO" Cycling Discussion
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=75179
Page 924 of 1889

Author:  record [ Sun Dec 02, 2012 6:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

What I meant is that he enjoys spending some time with them in the evening therefore he has hangover on the next day.

Author:  prendrefeu [ Sun Dec 02, 2012 7:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

I think (hope) he's going to have a great year in 2013.

Author:  Weenie [ Sun Dec 02, 2012 7:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion


Author:  Monkeyboy3333 [ Sun Dec 02, 2012 9:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

I don't know Prendfreu, do you think the likes of Grabsch, Steegmans, Maes, Fenn will will shield Cav. Velits and Martin aside.... They don't have the same ring as Eisel, Renshaw and Goss.. I would love him to dominate the sprints though don't get me wrong, what do you reckon?

Author:  pastronef [ Sun Dec 02, 2012 9:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Roubaix cross world cup

they are riding the track the wrong way! :mrgreen:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/uci-cy ... tos/245036" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Author:  dereksmalls [ Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

KATIE F*CKEN COMPTON! Nice work :D

Author:  prendrefeu [ Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Monkeyboy3333 wrote:
I don't know Prendfreu, do you think the likes of Grabsch, Steegmans, Maes, Fenn will will shield Cav. Velits and Martin aside.... They don't have the same ring as Eisel, Renshaw and Goss.. I would love him to dominate the sprints though don't get me wrong, what do you reckon?


When Cav (or Chav) was starting off with High Road, later to become HTC/Columbia/etc:. there were similar question marks about Eisel/Renshaw/Goss in support.
Turned out well.

My point is that I don't think we can necessarily predict a failure or success with Grabsch/Steegmans/Maes/Fenn. We don't know.
What we do know is that OPQS is not a team oriented around GC contenders, as Sky is. This opens up opportunity for Cavendish to have a team in support of his sprint efforts even during a major stage race.

Author:  Monkeyboy3333 [ Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Yep good point Prendfreu, I can't wait for the new season to roll in so we can find out!

Author:  stella-azzurra [ Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Oh baby!
Lemond to run for UCI presidency

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lemond- ... presidency

Author:  ultyguy [ Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Not sure if Lemond is the guy for that job, I think some of his ideas are a bit kooky at best.....but anything is better than Pat.

Author:  HammerTime2 [ Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Lemond might not be bad if he gets a chief operating officer to keep the trains running on schedule and attend to actual management, while he provides top level direction/inspiration.

Author:  petepeterson [ Mon Dec 03, 2012 6:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

This whole business with Contador not riding grand tours over points next year is really quite absurd. The current problems in pro cycling really do go much deeper than simply doping. What a f*cking disaster and a joke of a professional sport. I am no Bert fanboy but can you imagine Roger Federer not getting to play any grand slams next year?

An league of top tier of teams needs to be established as stable/credible franchises including development teams at lower levels. This current model of getting a sponsor(s) that allows you to throw together riders with enough collective points to hopefully get you into the grand tours is so amateur. Look at how other pro sports are run and pro cycling looks like a complete gong show. Team ownership should be desirable and be long term investments not just whimsical experiments for rich guys. Riders should have rights and should be unionized. Contracts should be longer than 2 years max... I could go on.

No doubt change is required at the top but I don't think that Lemond is the best guy for it. Actually, other than being a nice feel-good story at this point I don't know what value he brings. The doping issues are a part of larger issues of how the sport is arranged - the whole show needs to be overhauled and some with experience running a legit pro league is needed.

Author:  Ghost234 [ Mon Dec 03, 2012 6:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Lemond is definite the guy with the right attitude towards the change, but I'm not sure if he has the discipline required (really bad ADD) to keep the organization running efficiently. But maybe he will surround himself with individuals who will keep the organization running properly while he directs the vision? If he were to do that, he would be an excellent individual for the job.

Author:  hornedfrog [ Mon Dec 03, 2012 6:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Sojasun will be riding BH Bikes next season. Shame, there was something special about a French team riding a French bike.

Author:  tymon_tm [ Mon Dec 03, 2012 7:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

petepeterson wrote:
This whole business with Contador not riding grand tours over points next year is really quite absurd. The current problems in pro cycling really do go much deeper than simply doping. What a f*cking disaster and a joke of a professional sport. I am no Bert fanboy but can you imagine Roger Federer not getting to play any grand slams next year?

An league of top tier of teams needs to be established as stable/credible franchises including development teams at lower levels. This current model of getting a sponsor(s) that allows you to throw together riders with enough collective points to hopefully get you into the grand tours is so amateur. Look at how other pro sports are run and pro cycling looks like a complete gong show. Team ownership should be desirable and be long term investments not just whimsical experiments for rich guys. Riders should have rights and should be unionized. Contracts should be longer than 2 years max... I could go on.

No doubt change is required at the top but I don't think that Lemond is the best guy for it. Actually, other than being a nice feel-good story at this point I don't know what value he brings. The doping issues are a part of larger issues of how the sport is arranged - the whole show needs to be overhauled and some with experience running a legit pro league is needed.


very well said

only agenda Lemond might have is 'end doping', one can tell that reading his words on Dick Pound. while it (=doping) only touches the surface of problems in cycling, how would he even begin his work in that direction? call everyone in and tell them to stop? good luck with your (plausible) run mr. Lemond :popcorn:

Author:  Wingnut [ Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

It actually sounds like Lemond just wants change to begin at the UCI...people are jumping the gun if they think Lemond believes he's the messiah...

Velonews:

LeMond admitted that he might not be the best candidate to replace McQuaid, who has been under pressure to explain how Armstrong managed to avoid detection for so long, amid allegations that the UCI accepted cash to cover up a positive test. But he said he was prepared to work hard to make the UCI “more democratic, more transparent and find the best candidate in the long term to lead” the organization.

Author:  Weenie [ Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion


Page 924 of 1889 All times are UTC+01:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/