Former pro cyclist-turned-Strava KOM hunter Phil Gaimon addressed the comments of a certain other retired American cyclist, you know, the one who had seven yellow jerseys stripped for doping. Lance Armstrong bulldozed his way into the final weekend of the Tour de France, warning Tadej Pogačar "don't give people a reason to hate you" and "don't give them a reason to doubt you" after the Slovenian ruthlessly won his fourth stage of the race, at Isola 2000 on Friday, picking off the breakaway riders to beat Matteo Jorgenson with another brutal mountain performance.
Armstrong called cycling a "political game", claiming relevance and being the person best qualified to talk about the subject because... I guess, he got caught for one of sport's worst cheating scandals so... he's allowed to make mysterious comments about future generations? Something like that...
Gaimon was unimpressed, telling his podcast: "Never, ever listen to Lance Armstrong about anything." Cool, story done, next...
Only joking, he added on the episode released yesterday: "This was the performance (Isola 2000) that put it over the line for some folks, this is unbelievable, we don't believe in this guy any more.
"People keep doing these climb comparisons. They're looking at the climbs from Pantani and Lance and Ulrich and all those guys. And of course, Tadej smashed a tonne of those this year. And you look at that, it's like, oh, well, that's a bad sign. But then look at this is 25, 30 years ago for a lot of those. Think about if you went to ride Pantani's bike right now up a hill, you'd be like, 'ew'. Everything has progressed. All sports progress, technology has progressed, aerodynamics, equipment.
> Comparing the Tour de France bikes that won on the Plateau de Beille in 1998 and 2024: Marco Pantani's Bianchi Mega Pro XL vs Tadej Pogačar's Colnago V4Rs
"And then you get into like nutrition and training. Every sport is going to get faster over time. Cycling from a certain era was going to regress a little bit and then progress over time. Am I saying Tadej is clean? No, I don't know that guy. But I see a lot of comments like, 'man, don't be naive, everyone's doing it'. No, they're not. That is absolutely not true. I know a lot of guys in the peloton still, I'm very close friends with a handful of them.
"I'm not best friends with anyone on the podium, but I'm super tight with people who are very high up, who have gotten significant results this year, whose names have been mentioned in these events, who I trust thoroughly. So is everyone doing it?
No, even back then, that wasn't the case."
Pogačar was of course on hand to collect his prize for winning the Tour last night — a press conference with questions about doping...to which he replied: "There will always be doubts because cycling was damaged so much in the past, before my time. In any sport, if somebody is winning there's always jealousy, there's always haters. If you don't have haters, then you're not succeeding.
"In cycling, WADA and the UCI invested a lot of money and time to make this sport clean. I think this is one of the cleanest sports in the whole world because of what happened so many years ago. I tell you now, it's not worth it. I think taking anything that can risk your health or your heart is super stupid. You can cycle until you're 35, but there's a long way to enjoy life afterwards. It would be stupid to do this and risk your life for stupid racing."
Add new comment
13 comments
Sorry but Froome sounds like an arrogant 'do you know who I am' t**t. If you need accreditation to get passed then get it. Don't expect officials to risk their jobs just becuase they don't recognise you. And even if they did, that doesn't give you the right to get passed anyway.
Have you considered that maybe the guard was wrong and that he didn't need accreditation, that maybe he was told by the organisers he could just come along and they would let him in? Clearly accreditation was not essential as the guard eventually did let him in. Best not to judge without the full facts.
Pog would be so much more believable if he didn't sound so much like Lance.
Pog: "I think this is one of the cleanest sports in the whole world because of what happened so many years ago. I tell you now, it's not worth it. I think taking anything that can risk your health or your heart is super stupid. I think this is one of the cleanest sports in the whole world because of what happened so many years ago. I tell you now, it's not worth it. I think taking anything that can risk your health or your heart is super stupid."
It sounds a lot like Lance talking about how the Tour is clean because of, well, Festina, and how he'd never dope because of, well, "cancer.'' And all this worrying about health risks from people who regularly engage in high-speed, potentially deadly downhill runs on their bikes on a regular basis.
Hopefully, Pog is clean. But it might feel better if he just said: "I"m not doping. I don't know what else to tell you. You'll have to take my word for it, I guess, because I can't bring myself to offer phony claims as to how that wouldn't be healthy.''
But if he isn't doping and that is one of his main motivations not to then his claims aren't phony. Honestly, I know we're all geared towards suspicion and for good reason but he really is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't, isn't he?
ETA:
That's a totally nonsensical argument, on that basis you can't believe anyone who says they care about their health if they undertake any potentially dangerous activities as part of their job or hobbies. I'm fond of a good descent myself (nothing like Tour speeds but 80 km/h or so on a good surface with a clear run), I don't disregard my health the rest of the time on the basis that I could be killed doing it. These are young men who devote their lives to achieving superhuman levels of fitness, just because their pursuit also involves high risk activities doesn't mean you can write off as nonsense any claim that they care about their health.
Couple of dashcams from the w/e
Interesting one asking who is a fault
https://youtu.be/4ZVZBFRWTEQ?t=142
Driver fails to understand the difference between middle of the lane and middle of the road. Fails to think about where to overtake safely and what happens even if the overtake is ok.
https://youtu.be/jDMr4AEEn8M?t=124
I'm going to go with pretty much everybody:
This is the location from the dashcam overlay - https://maps.app.goo.gl/WZF7QD1PvVodr6mP6
Possibly the cyclist thought the driver was going to turn right, that would explain the attempt to pass on the left.
Gotta say, I went into that comment section expecting a fight, but the general consensus (surprisingly) seems to be that "yeah, he's obviously going to take primary approaching a junction, why would you even think of overtaking there?!".
Maybe we're finally getting somewhere?
Yes, I could only find loads of comments against the driver and none against the cyclist.
I'm not convinced that it's the cyclist, on either of those clips
#1 - motorist overtakes cyclist who is overtaking (badly) parked heavy plant, then thinks that they have evaporated so it's safe to turn left.
#2 - motorist clearly doesn't realise that the approach to a junction is a really bad place to overtake a cyclist, cyclist disagrees so moves right ever so slightly so as to discourage said unsafe overtake.
Guardian interview with Victoria Pendleton
Well that was a fucking depressing read. Poor woman.
She has been through so much shit. Her successes during and since her cycling career are remarkable achievements.
She's one of so many athletes British Cycling, particularly of that era, have utterly failed