cptgaio

"Then we could also discuss Indurain, one who, with that weight, flew uphill like a chamois… History is not made with ifs or buts: Indurain was never found positive, so he wasn’t doping, period. Pantani’s hematocrit was found to be at levels incompatible with physiological normality back in the '95 incident, but since the specter of EPO did not yet exist, the episode was brushed aside until it resurfaced in '99. Your argument, 'if Indurain had truly been the king of climbers as you say, he would have won it,' could be flipped back at you by saying that in exchange for that, he won 5 Tours and 2 Giros, mostly dominating in time trials and never losing, or almost (showing that he could stick with others without straining in the slightest) uphill. I repeat, it’s quite futile to keep bringing up episodes from a single Giro against an incredible career (he was human too, after all). Regarding Pantani, 'sir,' you cite the episode with Ullrich where Pantani simulated an attack to humiliate the German (seems far from being a 'gentleman' honestly) and one with a teammate... come on, that seems a bit thin… then yes, on a couple of occasions he was, but in '98 and '99 (before being stopped) he mostly behaved like a cannibal. In any case, I think we have quite different views of what a cyclist should be, so the debate could go on for centuries, so I’ll end it here. Take care!"

ehm... Campiglio...

I think we misunderstood each other: I was throwing out some "absurdities" ("Fine Carriera", "Virenque", "Maglia a Pois"... by the way, let me say about the last one that anyone can criticize something when it hasn't been won...) to illustrate that a career should be evaluated in its entirety and not (by citing a single Giro that just happened to be the only stage race where Pantani finished ahead of Indurain) in detail: the entirety of Indurain's career shows that in the vast majority of cases on climbs, no one was able to drop him (something that happened, and I can believe it, he was human! but rarely) and that in the end, the Spaniard gave up many stage wins out of "nobility" (I believe he would have had more than Pantani in the end) and this opinion is shared not only by fans (by the way, your irony on the topic doesn't affect me since I was cheering for Bugno...) but by almost all commentators and insiders. As for the poor Pantani, aside from the fact that all his most significant victories still cast a shadow of doping (I'll preempt you: maybe everyone dopes, but I give the benefit of the doubt to those who aren’t caught, and yes, I know Pantani wasn’t stopped for confirmed doping but was suspended for high hematocrit: please don't bring up this discussion, really from a fan perspective, otherwise we’ll talk about blood values compatible with life ;-) ) I repeat that he was chronologically the last cyclist to truly excite me (after him, nothing) and that I saw him live more than once (I would have liked to see him on Mortirolo in '99 but he ended up in Madonna di Campiglio...) but, indeed, he always excited me with exploits and never for consistency. In any case, I knew that my stance would be considered "strange" but that's how it is: I believe that History will ultimately side more with me than with Pantani's fans. Goodbye.

Ps: in that Tour, the polka dot jersey went to a certain Virenque, following your reasoning we should say he was the greatest climber of all time :-D

mmm, complicated話題 because then I could tell you that Indurain (even if he would win again) was now at the end of his career (which, if I'm not mistaken, ended two years later) but that's not the point. The point (without bringing up that one of the two had a heavy stain on his career) is that comparing the two "adventures," and staying within the realm of climbing, Indurain had very few breakdowns and mostly when he was very young and at an (cycling-wise) advanced age, demonstrating a continuity and a superiority that often seemed embarrassing if he hadn’t proven to be a gentleman. Of course, Pantani had more striking exploits but let’s remember he was a "pure climber" while Indurain was not, and so he often had to think about other things: considering all this, I believe that overall the Spaniard was superior even in this specialty. Anyway, a couple of months after the Giro you mention, there was also the Tour: I would go check the standings.

That day, probably. But precisely, probably only that day, and History isn't made out of single days. Then the fact that Pantani was chronologically the last cyclist to thrill me is a different matter. Coming back to this page, I saw Nes's question: no, I hadn't drunk anything: did you a few days ago, during the last days of Brat12? ;-)

Beautiful little disc, my favorite of theirs is "The Crimson Idol".

@Brusko: thank you! @Nes: ah there it is!

He has made at least three great albums, beyond preconceptions and dislikes ("Portrait of an American Family," "Antichrist Superstar," and "Holy Wood," although in the latter you can sense the end of the collaboration with Reznor). Then, for one reason or another (via Reznor, indeed, and also via Ramirez, who has returned here), he really got lost. This piques my curiosity, if nothing else because of Twiggy... we shall see...

Well, let’s not get carried away: this is quite an album (and a 5 on a site like this is justified, in fact I gave it one too) but there are female singer-songwriters in the English-speaking world at this level (and even higher)... there are "5s" and "5s," you know...