Stage 21 - July 26th
Montereau-Fault-Yonne—Paris Champs-Élysées (164km)

Stage 21 ResultsFinal ResultsLive Replay
  1. Alberto Contador (Astana) at 85:48:35
  2. Andy Schleck (Saxo Bank) at 04:11
  3. Lance Armstrong (Astana) at 05:24
  4. Bradley Wiggins (Garmin - Slipstream) at 06:01
  5. Frank Schleck (Saxo Bank) at 06:04
  6. Andréas Klöden (Astana) at 06:42
  7. Vincenzo Nibali (Liquigas) at 07:35
  8. Christian Vande Velde (Garmin-Slipstream) at 12:04
  9. Roman Kreuziger (Liquigas) at 14:16
  10. Christophe Le Mevel (Francaise Des Jeux) at 14:25

The Explainer: Looking beyond the downtube sticker

Published: Mar. 18, 2009
Perhaps Davis Phinney is contemplating the origin of his "Huffy."
Perhaps Davis Phinney is contemplating the origin of his "Huffy."

Dear Explainer,
After reading VeloNews.com’s recent article about the return of the Litespeed Blade, which features a picture of Lance Armstrong riding a Trek-badged Blade, I was reminded of a question that's been nagging me ever since I learned that some of Greg LeMond's Tour-winning "LeMonds" were, in fact, manufactured by Calfee.

Why, in the world of professional cycling, do bike companies (Litespeed) seem to gladly allow other bike companies (Trek) to appropriate their wares and essentially claim them as their own? It seems Postal-Discovery-Astana is particularly apt to slap Bontrager and Trek stickers on equipment they like. What gives?
Ian Harris
Portland, Oregon

Dear Ian,
It’s important to remember that the Trek/Blade story dates back 10 years now. At the time, Trek didn’t manufacture a comparably aero time trial bike and Armstrong was, as is still the case, a stickler about what kind of equipment he had at his disposal. Anyway, Trek has long since stepped up to the plate on that front and quickly began producing a superb time trial bike of its own.

But what happened at the ’99 Tour? You might recall that Armstrong was already quite comfortable with Litespeed and the Blade from his time at Motorola. Litespeed at Motorola? Yes, the Motorola team was sponsored by Caloi, a Brazilian bike manufacturer, in its final year, but a small sticker on those bikes noted that these Calois were manufactured by Merckx. But that wasn’t the full story, because when Merckx first produced titanium bikes under its name, it turned to the company that was at the top of the field when it came to producing titanium bikes — Litespeed, the company owned by the Lynskey family in Ooltewah, Tennessee. That last year, 1996, the Motorola team rode bikes that we used to joke were “Caloi … by Merckx … by Litespeed.” That included the Blade. Merckx, of course, now produces its ti' bike in-house and the relationship with Litespeed has run its course.

In 1999, when Armstrong began what would turn into a seven-year run of Tour wins, he naturally opted for the time trial bike he regarded as the fastest at the time. The ensuing coverage of the mislabeled Litespeed may have contributed in part to Armstrong’s choice of a title for his first autobiography, “It’s Not About the Bike.”

But your note raises an interesting question about labeling in general. In that same Tour, I remember spotting a bike sitting atop a Cofidis team car that in no way bore any resemblance to the aluminum MBKs ridden by most of the squad. As I pulled out my camera to snap a photo of the finely sculpted dropouts on what appeared to be a titanium bike with an MBK paint job, a voice yelled out from the team camper.

“No, no! Don’t take a picture of that!”

Bobby Julich, also a former Motorola rider, soon emerged from the vehicle and explained that he had gone “through all sorts of hell” to convince his team and its bike sponsor to allow him to ride the Litespeed with which he was comfortable as opposed to the MBK on which he never quite felt at ease.

The objection didn’t come from Litespeed, it came from MBK, which was concerned about just that sort of “spy photo” getting out. I think we managed to mention it anyway and that’s exactly what Litespeed was probably hoping for. That year, Litespeed, which didn’t have a Division I team sponsorship, was pleased to have its product make appearances at the Tour, anyway. Litespeed not only sold those bikes to willing buyers, it was more than happy to quietly let people know just how many of its bikes were actually winning stages at the Tour.

The practice dates back to the early days of the sport, when riders would often have their favorite frame builders produce custom rides, which were then painted to look like sponsors’ bikes. It probably comes as no surprise, for example, that Andy Hampsten didn’t actually win the 1988 Giro d’Italia astride a Huffy. The 7-Eleven crew were riding bikes built by American frame builder Ben Serotta.

So, Hampsten rode a Serotta in the Giro? Well ... no. It seems that some of those Huffys were actually built by John Slawta, the framebuilder who produces frames under the Land Shark label. Huffy ... by Serotta ... by ... knock, knock, knock. Who is it? Land Shark.

LeMond not only experimented with Calfee’s early carbon creations, he also rode bikes made by his friend, the framebuilder Roland Della Santa, a relationship that dated back to the three-time Tour winner’s days as a junior.

Sometimes, however, such mislabeling does cause the original builder a great deal of frustration, especially when he might not have agreed to the nom de guerre. Case in point: Eddy Merckx’s successful hour-record attempt in Mexico City. The bike was built by Ernesto Colnago and sported Merckx’s name on the downtube. That was fine with Colnago — but just before Merckx hit the track, the bike also got plastered with stickers from Mexican bike manufacturer Windsor. Colnago was furious, and was still talking about the incident 25 years later when he showed a group of us the bike, which was part of a collection of history-making rides at his factory.

While the practice continues today, it seems to be less common than it once was. For one thing, carbon bikes tend to have more recognizable and manufacturer-specific characteristics than do their old steel counterparts. For example, it didn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that despite its sponsorship by Scott, the Columbia-Highroad team was still using its Giant time trial bikes at the Tour of California.

It’s also become something of a game for reporters — each of whom is armed with a suitable digital camera — to see if they can spot that type of thing at a team truck or atop a team car. Bike sponsors are increasingly reluctant to have it discovered that their riders are more comfortable on someone else’s product. To their credit, those same sponsors are also more responsive to riders’ individual requirements and manage to pay a lot of attention to the importance of fit.

Email Charles Pelkey


"The Explainer" is a regular feature on VeloNews.com. If you have a question related to the sport of cycling that our editors might be able to answer, feel free to send your query to WebLetters@CompetitorGroup.com and we'll take a stab at answering. Not all letters will be published and some questions may be combined with those of other readers. Please include your full name and hometown.