Gen Posted June 3, 2019 Posted June 3, 2019 Yip but he was never hunted and crucified by the media like Pharmstrong was.And still celebrated by the cycling community...messed up hey
Simon Kolin Posted June 3, 2019 Posted June 3, 2019 South Africa, Singapore, United Kingdom, New Zealand, Australia, Ireland etc - places where Trek sales boomed and people wore yellow rubber bands. And then of course any other country where people ride bikes or have an interest in cycling or have seen a Nike swoosh. I don't think it's a stretch to say LA popularised cycling more than any other individual in history. It's probably a bit of a stretch to disagree. I am basing this on sales of books, the yellow bands that proliferated the planet, replica US postal/Discovery kits, donations to Livestrong, Trek sales and the post scandal popularity of his podcast. Hell the doping scandal itself is proof of his impact on cycling.He was also paid bucketloads of cash which wouldn't happen if he wasn't doing something for corporate bottom lines and getting people on bikes. Maybe he had no influence on you, but me and Bradley Wiggins ride because of him. I'm faster obviouslySorry, but I can't agree with those generalisations. There is no doubt that Lance (and the US postal team) influenced the culture of cycling in the US during the early to mid 2000s more than any other. There is no doubt that Trek saw an increase in sales during that period too. I won't even contest that. I don't agree that Lance managed to increase cyclings popularity in other countries, particularly in Europe to the degree it has been suggested. Europe/Australia/Asia didn't need Lance/Nike/Trek to come along and influence an existing love affair with cycling. The cycling culture has a deep rooted existence in those countries prior to the Lance Effect. Sure, lots of yellow bands were sold and sure maybe Trek sales increased somewhat, but to say that Lance has had the biggest impact on popularising cycling outside of the US is, in my opinion, just nonsense. I might suggest that Wiggins, Trott, Froome for example have had far more influence on popularising cycling (in the UK) than Lance ever did.
SwissVan Posted June 3, 2019 Posted June 3, 2019 I would agree that Lance certainly popularised cycling and raised awareness of le Tour within the US unlike anyone before, but I wouldn't say that holds true in the rest of the world.Bikehub SA worldThe TDF thread during the LA era was much more popular than now days.
DieselnDust Posted June 3, 2019 Posted June 3, 2019 There are two cycling growth points in the the western world that coincide with the emergence and dominance of two English speaking teams namely US Postal and tTeam Sky.those growth points also coincide with very good global economic growth...Having English speaking icons on English speaking teams talking to English speaking journalists for English speaking publications has a massive effect on the popularity of the sport in English speaking countries.it is likely false to lay the credit squarely on The Pharmstrong brigade but the influence is undeniable
Jaco-fiets Posted June 3, 2019 Posted June 3, 2019 No. Eddy Merckx is the greatest cyclist. Compare their records and lance pales into insignificance besides Eddy Merckx.He was one of the best ever but he would have had his ass handed to him in this era
Simon Kolin Posted June 3, 2019 Posted June 3, 2019 He was one of the best ever but he would have had his ass handed to him in this eraAnd you base this declarative on.....?
Jaco-fiets Posted June 3, 2019 Posted June 3, 2019 And you base this declarative on.....?My opinion! Not really that many guys in his era that only raced. Most of them had full time jobs. I just think he would have been a great talent in a sea of great talents and most likely would not have repeated the performances he did would he have raced in these times
Mr. G Posted June 3, 2019 Posted June 3, 2019 Besides being the greatest cyclist ever, awesome podcast on TDF Agree!
PlemPlem Posted June 3, 2019 Posted June 3, 2019 My opinion! Not really that many guys in his era that only raced. Most of them had full time jobs. I just think he would have been a great talent in a sea of great talents and most likely would not have repeated the performances he did would he have raced in these times While everyone is entitled to his opinion, this comparison is similar to CR7 or Lionel Messi with Pele. Different era's, different playing styles, different teams and training methods etc. However, my opinion here, one cannot argue with the numbers; to name a few of Eddie's achievements: Winning all the Grand Tours and also five GT's in a row, winning just about every one-day classic, more than once winning with long solo breakaways, winning the World Champs etc. Some of his records still stand today! Lance was only famous for a World Championship and his seven drug induced TdF's. No one knows what Eddie " The Cannibal" Merckx would have achieved with modern equipment and riding techniques. In my 'humble' opinion Lance was still an exceptional athlete but Eddie is the King! Just like Pele , who won three World Cups while the other two have a combined total of zero, is the King!
The Ouzo Posted June 3, 2019 Posted June 3, 2019 But ask anyone that has no interest in cycling to name a pro cyclist and LA will be your answer the majority of the time.
Wayne pudding Mol Posted June 3, 2019 Posted June 3, 2019 Sorry, but I can't agree with those generalisations. There is no doubt that Lance (and the US postal team) influenced the culture of cycling in the US during the early to mid 2000s more than any other. There is no doubt that Trek saw an increase in sales during that period too. I won't even contest that. I don't agree that Lance managed to increase cyclings popularity in other countries, particularly in Europe to the degree it has been suggested. Europe/Australia/Asia didn't need Lance/Nike/Trek to come along and influence an existing love affair with cycling. The cycling culture has a deep rooted existence in those countries prior to the Lance Effect. Sure, lots of yellow bands were sold and sure maybe Trek sales increased somewhat, but to say that Lance has had the biggest impact on popularising cycling outside of the US is, in my opinion, just nonsense. I might suggest that Wiggins, Trott, Froome for example have had far more influence on popularising cycling (in the UK) than Lance ever did. Like you said in your opinion....
Simon Kolin Posted June 3, 2019 Posted June 3, 2019 Like you said in your opinion....Great input Wayne. Great input.
Wayne pudding Mol Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 Great input Wayne. Great input.And that is a nice intelligent and witty comeback. There wasn't much to add, you clearly have your misguided opinion and enjoy being contrary. In my opinion Whilst not condoning LAs doping, his influence on cycling and general contribution to healthy lifestyles and bicycle sales is undeniable.....unless Simon says
Simon Kolin Posted June 4, 2019 Posted June 4, 2019 And that is a nice intelligent and witty comeback. There wasn't much to add, you clearly have your misguided opinion and enjoy being contrary. In my opinion Whilst not condoning LAs doping, his influence on cycling and general contribution to healthy lifestyles and bicycle sales is undeniable.....unless Simon saysOh Wayne, do yourself a favour....go back and read my past comments. I have never tried to suggest otherwise nor deny that Lance has had a huge impact, for whatever reason, popularising cycling as a professional sport, promoting a healthy lifestyle, increasing revenue for Trek or being the champion for the Livestrong Foundation. Likewise, I've also never condoned/condemned his actions, nor have I ever denied he had any influence on my views or aspirations as a cyclist. My disagreement addresses your misguided assertion that "LA popularised cycling more than any other individual in history" for the English speaking world. Sorry Wayne, but that's just not factually correct.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.