I agree with you whole heartedly. I've studied a lot about our frontier history and the French influence on our history has been huge. Much of the interior of our nation was explored and, in some cases settled, by the French long before the English speaking people came along.
Same in New York City. Being a rude asshole is pretty much part of the culture there. I mean, to put the shoe on the other foot, I'd hate to have my country judged by some snooty rude New Yorker or some xenophobic rural redneck.
You're nuts. LeMond in his prime was both a better climber and a better time trialist then Lance. Over the length of their careers Armstrong has had the better career but Armstrong is not in the same league as Eddie Mercx, Bernard Hinault, Fausto Copi or Jaque Anquitel. If Contador continues to race in the other grand tours he could eclipse Armstrong too. He's winning at an impressive rate for being only 27. To put that in perspective Armstrong won his first TDF at 27. Contador by comparison had all ready won 4 grand tours before turning 27. If Contador wins both the TdF and the Vuelta this year he'll have won 6 grand tours to Armstrongs 1 at the same age and he's just entering his peak years for a cyclist. (25 to 33).
Against LeMond? I agree. I said Armstrong has had a better career. I'll also stand by what I said. In his prime LeMond was a more talented sprinter, climber and time trialist then Lance. In fact LeMond still holds the TDF time trial record.
Dude, have you ever studied the Frontier history of North America? I mean you're making a gross generalization that is silly in the extreme and wrong. Until the 1750's the French had colonized a vastly larger portion of North America then the British had. They could not have done that had "The American Colonist" hated them.
Dude, chill out, have a toke. I don't hate Lance. I'm a big fan and he's the most dominant rider of the last 15 years.
Really so why was it prior to 1750 more of North America had been controlled and colonized by the French then British Colonist? Why did the American colonist ally themselves with the French during the Revolutionary war if the colonist hated them? Please explain away these contradictions. By limiting your scope to just "The British Colonies" shows you understand neither our colonial or frontier histories.
Dude, you need to quite taking history lessons from Dixie and go to the original sources. I'd suggest you go and read the flack Adams took for supporting the British against the French during the French revolution and the shit he took from the American public and his fellow revolutionaries and then come back and tell me how much we hated the French. I'd also suggest you look into the frontier history of the NW Territory and the Mississippi River and Ohio River Valley's and the substantial influence the French had there.
The problem is, there's no one in Contadors class as a GC contendor. Schleck is a hell of a climber but he's not much of a sprinter or a time trialist. I mean Lance always had Ullrich breathing down his neck and you knew that Inudrain couldn't climb with Virenque or Pantani so it was always up for grabs until he'd crush them in the final time trial and LeMond perpetually rode for very weak teams or actually had to compete against his own team so he was always out there on his own it seemed. All that made for a lot of drama and interest. But this shit of putting a supper team together, have the leader go out and get a small lead and then ride on everyone else wheel get's old.
