|Was Lance overtrained?||esbike|
Jul 30, 2003 11:21 AM
|Doesn't it seem that even if all the bad things that happened to Lance weren't there, he would have still been a little off form in the first 3/4 of the race? Could he have been
somewhat overtrained, giving his legendary grueling training schedule?
What is interesting to me are Lance's and Carmicheal's post-race comments about how, next year, he is *really* going to train in order to be less vulnerable. Isn't he already training as much as he possibly can???
Jul 30, 2003 11:26 AM
|A key indicator of overtraining is feeling as though you are sick, when you actually are healthy. Armstrong actually was sick in the first half of the race - which showed similar results to if he had been overtrained.
I don't think it's an issue of quantity of training, but rather quality, and they probably feel that they can focus even more than they have on the race.
|I doubt it||DougSloan|
Jul 30, 2003 11:29 AM
|In my experience, if you were overtrained at the beginning of a grand tour, you would not get better as you raced an average of 100 miles per day for 3 weeks; Lance appeared to get better as it went.
Reading between the lines, I believe that Lance was a bit distracted this year, and he took it a bit for granted that he was better than everyone else and would win by a similar large margin. In other words, he did not do everything he could.
Jul 30, 2003 1:17 PM
|... I fully agree with your last statement.
My wife and I have a joke that the first thing he said to Kristin on the Champs Elysses was "Don't you EVER threaten to leave me in the off-season again!" ;-)
|No, but it's not out of line to say that age is starting ...||Tom C|
Jul 30, 2003 1:54 PM
|to become a factor. 32, which is what he was 2 months away from during the meat of the tour has been a line of demarcation to other winners in the past. He is as of right now clearly not the same time trialist he was in the past. As far as comments about motivation, Armstrong is one whose history shows that he has never taken anyone or anything for granted. The Rocky Marciano like preparation he subjects himself to would be inconsistent with holding back, at least that's my take on it. The peloton perceived Armstrong as vulnerable and he was vulnerable and will be perceived as even more so next year.|
|it's not age...||BAi9302010|
Aug 1, 2003 2:20 PM
|32 used to be a year that a lot of riders would retire because it was a common belief that performance dropped around this age (because that's when it started to happen to Merckx, Hinault, etc. in the old days), but it isn't really the case any more because riders are starting to realize that if they train right they can stay competetive until their mid-thirties and sometimes later. Simoni is older than Lance and look at the pounding he delivered to everyone in the Giro. If he hadn't gone easy in the final tt he would have had one of the largest winning margins in post WWII Giro's. Last year Alex Zulle, at 33, had his best season since the Festina doping scandal. Same with Cipo, who at 35 had his best season to date.
Three of the best tt'ists in the world are in their mid-30's, Uwe Peschel-34, Michael Rich-33, and sergui Gontchar-33.
Also look at tyler Hamilton, he just had his best ever season and TDf and he's older than LA too.
Lance can't really start using age as an excuse yet ;-)
|No, but it's not out of line to say that age is starting ...||il sogno|
Aug 12, 2003 5:55 PM
|I agree. Next year is going to be a real free for all.|
|it was said during the tour||rufus|
Jul 31, 2003 6:35 AM
|by phil or paul, quoting someone, maybe carmichael or lance himself, that they felt he was a bit under-raced coming into the tour.|
|NO! Because of problems at home he traveled too and from.||Canidraftyou|
Jul 31, 2003 11:41 AM
|It was printed more than once, that Lance was not getting in the training he wanted. Because of problems at home he traveled too and from. He is already on the move all the time, but have additional problems like his marrige really hurt him.
No he did not over train, he was not where he wanted to be.
Aug 5, 2003 5:30 AM
|I would add to everything that has been posted so far, peaking' is an important part of a Grand Tour. I don't believe Lanced peaked this year as well as he has in previous Tours. If the Tour would have been 2 weeks later, we might have seen more of the dominating' Lance. What do you think??|| |