Rather, I blame the age we live in (since the trashing of Clarence Thomas and the fair and balanced reporting of Dan Rather): the seriousness of the allegations is all that really matters anymore. Too bad; so sad. Anyone with an agenda that has any kind of reach into society can start the trash mobile rolling--and, they always will do just that.
:)
Again I won't contend for a fact that Armstrong doped, because I don't know that as a fact. However, the reasonable suspicion he did is way more than just trash talk.
Consider the context: Richard Virenque, and the entire Festina Team; Marco Pantani, David Millar, Roberto Heras, Jan Ullrich, Tyler Hamilton, Floyd Landis, Alexandre Vinokourov, Bjarne Riis, Ivan Basso, Santiago Perez, Jorg Jaksche, Michael Rasmussen, Frankie Andreu, Iban Mayo, Pascal Herve, Dario Frigo, Nicola Chesinal, Roberto Sgambelluri, Faat Zakirov, Raimondas Rumsus, Setfano Casagrande Martin Hvastija, Cedric Vasseur, Cristian Moreni, etc, etc, etc.
All admitted or adjudicated dopers. And many of that list never tested positive for PED's, or if they did, passed numerous tests before they finally tested postive.
Given that all evidence indicates that numerous people in the Peleton took PED's, particuarly in the early 90's before there was an effective test for EPO, that Armstrong's B samples did in fact test postive for EPO(after an effective test became available), that Armstrong only avoided a postive test for steroids with a backdated prescription, and that at least 3 individuals have stated they have first hand knowledge of Armstrong's drug use (one testifying under the penalty of perjury), the idea that Armstrong just might have used drugs is way more than just an idle accusation.
Face it, in the time Armstrong was racing the use of PED's was rampant in the Peleton. It's not a stretch to believe that Armstrong might have been using them also.
oldspark
02-07-08, 06:30 AM
I have to agree with merlinextraligh, if you follow cycling very much at all it is reasonable to come to the conclusion that he doped at some point in his career.
BostonRoadee
02-07-08, 11:41 AM
Again I won't contend for a fact that Armstrong doped, because I don't know that as a fact. However, the reasonable suspicion he did is way more than just trash talk.
Consider the context: [...]
Face it, in the time Armstrong was racing the use of PED's was rampant in the Peleton. It's not a stretch to believe that Armstrong might have been using them also.
Merlin, you just about nailed it. This is the long version of what I said earlier.
However, I will still decline to tell ppl who *don't* follow the sport closely that I think "He doped, end of story." No solid proof is no solid proof, and defaming somebody based on circumstantial evidence is pretty low. (Not that you defamed him, Merlin, I'm just making a separate point.) The sport has enough troubles as it is.
kosherdave
02-08-08, 07:33 PM
I think he was clean. Innocent until proven guilty. Plus, there is always someone who will come along and be... just... awesome at something. I think no one can believe anyone could be that good, so that makes them think it is impossible and that he cheated. Personally, I just think he is that good. He sure trains enough!
wagathon
02-08-08, 08:57 PM
I think he was clean. Innocent until proven guilty. Plus, there is always someone who will come along and be... just... awesome at something. I think no one can believe anyone could be that good, so that makes them think it is impossible and that he cheated. Personally, I just think he is that good. He sure trains enough!
... and that brings the conjecturing full circle, i.e., at least apply a little reason and reasonably conclude that if everyone is doing it, then maybe Lance was unbeatable for so long precisely because he wasn't everyone.
:)
Mambwe
02-14-08, 07:29 AM
He's Clean!! As crappy as ALL sports are now there are always those athletes who are far better than the rest. Not every athlete who excels in their sport are doping. He took too many tests without ever being found guilty of doping. Show me the proof that he doped and maybe I will think otherwise.
Keith99
02-14-08, 11:08 AM
He's Clean!! As crappy as ALL sports are now there are always those athletes who are far better than the rest. Not every athlete who excels in their sport are doping. He took too many tests without ever being found guilty of doping. Show me the proof that he doped and maybe I will think otherwise.
Your post shows your gross bias. If Lance was far better than the rest why didn't he ever even try anything other than point to one race? Why no Tour/ Giro double? And in the TDF why no 2 jersey results? Why no TDF worlds double? Anyone far better than the rest would not only have tried for these he would have accomplished them.
Lance was focused, he set a goal and accomplished it. And a very impressive goal. But he did not ever establish credentials anywhere close to those who dominated in the past.
chewa
02-14-08, 02:49 PM
As an Ulle fan i was gutted when he was implicated. Gutted when Basso found out too (though did think he had doped watching him ride away from Simoni in the Giro)
Lance destroyed the best cyclists in the world (he has been quoted as rating Ulle as the best- just didn't have the work ethic- and they have now been shown to have been doping. His recovery in mountain stages was superhuman. I hate to think it (though I'm no fan of LA - too focussed for me) but suspect he doped at some time.
Mambwe
02-14-08, 05:41 PM
Your post shows your gross bias. If Lance was far better than the rest why didn't he ever even try anything other than point to one race? Why no Tour/ Giro double? And in the TDF why no 2 jersey results? Why no TDF worlds double? Anyone far better than the rest would not only have tried for these he would have accomplished them.
Lance was focused, he set a goal and accomplished it. And a very impressive goal. But he did not ever establish credentials anywhere close to those who dominated in the past.
I do realize that Lance might not be the most dominating or the best cyclist ever. I also never said he was. His season was based around one race; the Tdf. His competition also put an emphasis on this race. Lance didn't race in the one-day classics or Tour of Italy/Spain. He rode to win the Tour. He wasn't alone in this strategy. While he wasn't the only one using this strategy; he was the only one to win 7 consecutive Tdf.
Lance wouldn't have gone for two jerseys on the tour. He always maintained it was not his style. He always shared the wealth a la Pantani with the exception of Kloden. There is only one jersey that matters at the end of the race.
While I realize there was a lot he didn't do in terms of other races. I still say he is far better than the rest of the cyclists in his day. He also did it clean. Unlike most of the others.
islandboy
02-14-08, 07:55 PM
Yes, I believe! Why? You ask. Simple. At 47 I was diagnosed with cancer, operated on and spent a while recovering. Cancer does something to your mind. It is like playing Russian Roulette with your own life. Chamber empty you get to play on. Gives you a new "crisp" attitude. Over the past year I have out cycled anything I had done previous. Everything becomes important, intense. So could Lance do what he did, absolutely.
Oh, and follow the money. Nay sayers are geting rich/attention on publishing their thoughts.
GGDub
02-15-08, 08:52 AM
Yes, I believe! Why? You ask. Simple. At 47 I was diagnosed with cancer, operated on and spent a while recovering. Cancer does something to your mind. It is like playing Russian Roulette with your own life. Chamber empty you get to play on. Gives you a new "crisp" attitude. Over the past year I have out cycled anything I had done previous. Everything becomes important, intense. So could Lance do what he did, absolutely.
Oh, and follow the money. Nay sayers are geting rich/attention on publishing their thoughts.
While I don't doubt that his overcoming cancer played a huge role in his winnings, your money trail point holds no water.
Betsy Andreu, for example, has made nothing off of her testimony in a court of law, and in fact has been thoroughly smeared. Neither has Prentice Steffen, who lost his job (then was rehired) for telling journalists what went on at US postal. Fillipo Simeoni was ostracized by the peloton (and threatened by Armstrong) for testifying Armstrong's doctor gave him (Simeoni) EPO, he didn't say a thing about Armstrong and look what happened.
If you follow the money trail, its the people who are defending Lance who are getting rich (Ferrari, Nike, Oakley, Trek, Carmichael, Stapleton and of course the UCI), the people who have come forward have done so for ethical reasons (i.e. not lying under oath) and definetly not monetary.
I still have a humungous amount of respect for LA's accomplishments and what he's done for charity, but if you've followed cycling seriously for the past 50 years (hell, since its inception), you know that virtually every dominant rider has had some connection to PED's.
marin1
02-15-08, 09:27 AM
I think he was clean. Innocent until proven guilty. Plus, there is always someone who will come along and be... just... awesome at something. I think no one can believe anyone could be that good, so that makes them think it is impossible and that he cheated. Personally, I just think he is that good. He sure trains enough!
All pro cyclists train enough, they just don't have people filming them every time.
passion vision
02-15-08, 10:00 AM
People seem to forget that Lance and his trainer were pioneers of a new training/riding paradigm. At the least, they were faithful adherents to a forgotten method that was practiced by no other riders.
Lance's training method are perhaps most easily understood by comparing them to the methods of other riders like Ulle. By comparison, for example:
Lance fought body weight all year long, not just every riding season;
Lance established watt budgets for every winning leg of every stage of every TdF;
He developed a stratgegy for compiling the lowest overall time for each race; and,
He trained his body generate the required watts using a relatively high rpm.
The high rpm style that everyone knew Lance was using wasn't the product of drugs. The style was the produc t of planning and a whole array of techniques to objectively measure the results of training methods to the plan.
Lance's riding style is a method that actually puts Lance in the gonzo class of cycling competitors. Despite that, his detractors mistakenly think of him as a *****, because in stark contradistinction to the heavy pushers like Ulle et al.--who did do drugs--Lance did not excel by mashing big gears.
marin1
02-15-08, 11:29 AM
People seem to forget that Lance and his trainer were pioneers of a new training/riding paradigm. At the least, they were faithful adherents to a forgotten method that was practiced by no other riders.
Lance's training method are perhaps most easily understood by comparing them to the methods of other riders like Ulle. By comparison, for example:
Lance fought body weight all year long, not just every riding season;
Lance established watt budgets for every winning leg of every stage of every TdF;
He developed a stratgegy for compiling the lowest overall time for each race; and,
He trained his body generate the required watts using a relatively high rpm.
The high rpm style that everyone knew Lance was using wasn't the product of drugs. The style was the produc t of planning and a whole array of techniques to objectively measure the results of training methods to the plan.
Lance's riding style is a method that actually puts Lance in the gonzo class of cycling competitors. Despite that, his detractors mistakenly think of him as a *****, because in stark contradistinction to the heavy pushers like Ulle et al.--who did do drugs--Lance did not excel by mashing big gears.
No they weren't. Lance simply changed his style when he came back from cancer. Ullrich and Lance are completly different cyclists but Lance is not the only cyclist to spin at a higher rpm to generate his power.
It's spinners vs. mashers and it never went away and Lance did not reinvent it.
As far as Lance being a ***** because he spins, I personally like to mash the pedals only because spinning seems to hurt more. So no I don't think lance is a *****, he just had some pharmacutical help.
Keith99
02-15-08, 11:53 AM
I do realize that Lance might not be the most dominating or the best cyclist ever. I also never said he was. His season was based around one race; the Tdf. His competition also put an emphasis on this race. Lance didn't race in the one-day classics or Tour of Italy/Spain. He rode to win the Tour. He wasn't alone in this strategy. While he wasn't the only one using this strategy; he was the only one to win 7 consecutive Tdf.
Lance wouldn't have gone for two jerseys on the tour. He always maintained it was not his style. He always shared the wealth a la Pantani with the exception of Kloden. There is only one jersey that matters at the end of the race.
While I realize there was a lot he didn't do in terms of other races. I still say he is far better than the rest of the cyclists in his day. He also did it clean. Unlike most of the others.
Would that be the same Pantani who won Both GC and KOM in hte Giro in 98 and also the TDF that year?
Actaully Lances focus on one race was fairly unique, at least in degree. Lance was in a unique situation. His sponsers cared about the U.S. market and for that the TDF is pretty much all that matters.
passion vision
02-15-08, 03:10 PM
Lance admitted that winning the TdF was his primary focus. However, that preoccupation of thought did not exclude all other races, e.g., winner of the 2001 Tour of Switzerland, winner of the Dauphiné Libéré in 2002 and 2003, winner of the 2004 Tour de Georgia.
Lance probably got to the point where he didn't have to race for the money. He was able to call the shots, as far as what races he would and would not compete in, which makes it difficult to compare him with most other riders, past or present.
Gar Vanderosa
02-22-08, 03:26 AM
If Lance was clean, why the Christophe Bassons incident?
Any supporters care to take a crack at this one?
Good luck.
calamarichris
02-23-08, 10:16 PM
No one can say if he did or if he didn't, (just as none of us could say it about Riis until he confessed, or about Basso when he was cornered.) But I don't like Lance Armstrong. Why? Because there are people in here who insist that he's innocent because he's American, who are the same ones who look for ANY loophole for Landis, however improbable.
On top of that, I don't like the fact that LeMond was threatened by Trek (and therefore with Armstrong's complicity if not authorization) when Greg let it slip about Ferarri.
AND I didn't like the obvious fan involvement on D'Huez (probably people with the same sentiment as dim patriotic bulbs in here) who obstructed the road for everyone except Armstrong in '06.
And finally because he dumped his wife and started screwing the tabloid bimbos like Cheryl Crow and the Thompson Twin (OWTF her name is.) 'Lance' mainstreamed cycling here when I was perfectly happy with my obscure little pastime in this country, before my neighbors starting calling me "Lance". ('Sorry I still have both gonads and I don't use drugs.')
I also wonder how well he would do now that The Doping Era is supposedly history.
acoldspoon
02-24-08, 06:04 AM
Image aside and cancer aside, I have a simple question. Can anybody here speak up and say that they've spent quality time with Lance racing or socializing, and that he's struck you as a warm, friendly, and honest person? Because there are a lot of people with stories to the contrary. Do I have court worthy evidence he doped, heck no. Do I think he's the type of person that would consider cheating or hurting others to get what he wants, absolutely.
rbrsddn
02-24-08, 12:53 PM
Talk about beating a dead horse! Lance may have cheated, but he never failed a drug test. He was tested a rediculous amount of times, at all hours of day and night. Some people just can't deal with the fact that he was ahead of everyone due to his training schedule and singlemindedness to win the TDF. Was/ is he a great person? How the heck do I know? But he was awesome to watch when he won 7.
acoldspoon
02-24-08, 03:39 PM
Talk about beating a dead horse! Lance may have cheated, but he never failed a drug test. He was tested a rediculous amount of times, at all hours of day and night. Some people just can't deal with the fact that he was ahead of everyone due to his training schedule and singlemindedness to win the TDF. Was/ is he a great person? How the heck do I know? But he was awesome to watch when he won 7.
I guess I just liked it more when a nice American won, like Greg Lemond. I tend to root for more likable pros. Lance was never one of them. Just not a fan. Heck, I had a thousand times more fun watching guys like Bob Roll, John Tomac, Andy Hamptsen, and Davis Phinney race than watching Lance race.
calamarichris
02-24-08, 03:59 PM
Ahh... the past was indeed idyllic and simple. Whatever you do, DON'T go back and watch the old Coors Classic footage. Phinney was a pathetic crybaby when he got smoked by the Badger (who cheated by drafting apparently[?]), the commentators were ridiculously biased, and the unsportsmanlike childishness between 7/11 and the Grewal brothers on the Crest team resembled more of a '70's rumble between rival BMX gangs than an international cycling contest between professionals.
Alexi Grewal: The Past is in the Past. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7c_BOX-4Kc)
Another thing I always loved about Lemond: almost always Mr. Sportsman. So many times after he'd gotten beaten in a sprint, he'd be shaking hands with or patting the back of whomever beat him. Now everyone *****es about his saying anything remotely disparaging about Armstrong.
dissemination
02-25-08, 11:16 PM
" ... a special athlete rise up among the rest and just dominate? ... has that ever happened in the history of sports ??? Who knows....."
Don't know about Lance but I believe Rasmussen took something for the Tour last year. He blew Leipheimer and Contador away like he had a rocket up his posterior. Hey look, I know he is a great rider, but you have to be sheeting me. That was my reaction when I saw him run away from those guys the way he did!
Lance, like LeMond is history! Life moves on and past Lance. All glory is fleeting. Who cares at this point? I am more interested in seeing the Contador and Leipheimer ride this year!
Donegal
03-11-08, 02:20 PM
Everybody loves to hate Armstrong. I believe he was clean. One of the side effects of EPO is the possiblity of tumor growth. Not too smart, Lance is no dummy.
The B samples that supposedly tested positive were also tested at the Chateau Elementary School Lab.
Read the Landis transcripts, who knows if he doped or not? The science used tells us nothing but that lab is a total waste of time. Changing of baselines in experiments, no manuals, lack of training, lifting magnets left on magnetic resonance machines. What a joke. By the way, why was the story dropped?
Because the scientist that helped develop EPO made a direct statement to the validity of the test. EPO in a sample frozen for 6-7 years would totally have disappeared. Somehow we found it?
This sport has enough problems, let's not contribute to them. The nightly news only shows fires, accidents and crime in our major cities. Are we that desparate for suffering that we have to trash everybody and everything? Is there nothing good going on out there?
Cycling should be about talent, hard work and the race of the day. I am tired of listening to doping allegations, team exclusions, politics and other B.S. Why watch the race if the winner's allways dope?
bellweatherman
03-17-08, 10:50 AM
Armstrong is a liar. He tested positive w/ EPO and got off on a technicality.
Donegal
03-19-08, 06:00 PM
Armstrong is a liar. He tested positive w/ EPO and got off on a technicality.
The technicality that Armstrong got off on is simple. One of the scientists who originally developed EPO explained that it is impossible for any EPO to remain in a 6 year old sample that was frozen. That didn't stop L'Equipe from printing the false results. HOHOHOHO!!! Some dope test...Some lab... I wasn't impressed.
rlodewell
03-21-08, 09:07 AM
I certainly do not know the answer, like any of us do, but the evidence points to his using some method which is not sanctioned.
If nothing else the text message conversation between Vaughters and Andreau, where they both discuss how Postal and Discovery used blood doping, is very damning. One must assume that neither of them knew at the time that their records would be subpoenaed so one has to assume that this was just two friends chatting about shared experiences.
I mean, it could all be some sort of set up, but then you're really deep into some conspiracy theory, and what's the point of it?
That said, they were all doping, and he was still the best.
wagathon
03-21-08, 12:12 PM
The best evidence that Lance was not a doper is the proof offered by those desperate believers in his guilt.
ElJamoquio
03-21-08, 09:10 PM
lifting magnets left on magnetic resonance machines.
They weren't magnets.
Ophidian
03-22-08, 07:54 PM
I think he did. His ties to Farrari and If testing work in the 90's they would have found out about his cancer earlier. I read testicular cancer gives off positive drug test. It happen in soccer once or twice.
FlashUNC
03-23-08, 09:53 AM
Maybe I'm just too cynical, but I tend to agree with some other posters on the subject.
In an era when PEDs were creating a mini-generation of Franken-Superman in the peloton, the most dominant rider of that era was a man who came back from his deathbed to crush them all cleanly?
I highly doubt it.
Not to diminish what he did, because I still think its an incredible achievement. But there's too much doubt floating around, particularly given what happened with the LeMond/Landis/Armstrong triangle during those circus hearings.
wagathon
03-29-08, 02:14 AM
Maybe I'm just too cynical, but I tend to agree with some other posters on the subject.
In an era when PEDs were creating a mini-generation of Franken-Superman in the peloton, the most dominant rider of that era was a man who came back from his deathbed to crush them all cleanly?
I highly doubt it.
Not to diminish what he did, because I still think its an incredible achievement. But there's too much doubt floating around, particularly given what happened with the LeMond/Landis/Armstrong triangle during those circus hearings.
" ... cynical ... Superman ..." The great Eddie 'The Animal' Mercx simply left the pack and soldiered on, alone to the finish., race after race. Lance won TDFs minute by minute, by just minutes, and you suggest super-human intervention may be at work? That is cynical.
Homebrew01
03-31-08, 06:17 AM
Yes and No.
It still blows my mind that a clean Lance just crushed in the TdF the Ullrichs, Pantanis, Landises, Hamiltons, Bassos, Heras, Mayos, Vinokurovs, Rasmussens, and others who subesquently have been (justly or unjustly) convicted or accused of doping.
Maybe he just was that good. Maybe there was something more in his Wheaties than 2% milk.
Who knows. Give him a call and ask.
Corrected:
It still blows my mind that a pretending to be clean Lance just crushed
oldskoolkool
04-29-08, 02:09 PM
My doubts about Lance are based on the fact that his TDF record is not particularly impressive before his cancer and his involvement with Dr Ferrari,whereas if you look at the true natural champions of the TDF then they all had good results from their 1st event.Look at merckx,Hinault,Lemond,Fignon they all rode well in their first tours.Lance competed in four tours before his cancer and didn't do anything much at all,then he returns from cancer,'trains' with Dr Ferrari and wins every tour from '99 to '05....hmmm sounds suspicious to me.Plus as stated before the rest of the field and his competition were doping so how could a rider that was getting his ass whooped by these guys a few years prior,then come along and kick their asses.........it doesn't make sense.He wasn't a natural superhuman being as his supporters would like to portray him as,his results don't back that idea up.The facts speak for themselves.
Jay68442
04-29-08, 02:26 PM
Yes - I believe Lance was clean. There is no way he could have doped all 7 tours and gotten away with it. Not with the amount of testing they did on him.
classic1
05-02-08, 05:37 AM
I read in the media about Lance taking performance enhancing drugs. It's all nonsense. I believe the French government, the Tour de France organization, WADA, Greg LeMond, the international zionist new world order conspiracy and the terrorists who hate freedom are behind these allegations.
Todd Richards
05-02-08, 08:37 PM
I think Lance doped before he had cancer, thus the famous discussion with Doctors infront of greg and kathy lemond.
But chemo then reduced him to skin and bones, and rebuilding the body by cycling alone left him with a huge strength to weight ratio. look at photos of him in the world champ jersey (he looks HUGE) compared to the first tdf victory. He's gotta be 20 pounds lighter. he has always said since he had cancer he never lifted anything heavier than a gallon of milk, and upon retiring strangly said what he was going to do next was 'build a stone wall at my texas property'
He also had no reason to even try another substance.. especially after a near death circumstance.
USAZorro
05-02-08, 09:07 PM
Let me attempt to summarize:
"uh-huh"
"nu-unh"
"did too"
"no way"
"not sure"
"he's a hero"
"I can't stand him"
Do I have it right?
tollhousecookie
05-08-08, 03:44 PM
Hasn't this been done to death already?
This will remain until someone else wins 8.............
Phantom808
05-11-08, 03:33 PM
Yes - I believe Lance was clean. There is no way he could have doped all 7 tours and gotten away with it. Not with the amount of testing they did on him.
I have to agree with this post. For all the accusations against him, Armstrong has never been convicted of anything. For all the people who think he is guilty: how is it that all these other people who did cheat got caught, but Armstrong never did?
crtreedude
05-11-08, 03:59 PM
Did he? No clue. But, the idea of drugs is generally not to make a Superman, more, but to take a wannabe and make them a contender.
There are people who are naturally gifted. Tiger Woods is a good example. Yes he works hard, but at base, it is natural talent.
Perhaps what we are seeing is that Lance should have destroyed the field. Like the 4 minute mile guy did. But, drugs kept those who didn't have his natural advantages within range.
You sort of have to say "no detection, no foul", because otherwise, you say the whole thing is just androids. Fine with me if you want to, but there is no proof that EVERYONE in the TDF uses drugs. If detection is so lame that you can't be sure, what is the point of it?
GernBlanston
05-11-08, 07:09 PM
I absolutely think it's possible to dope in any pro sport and get away with it. I think there's progress being made, and more and more cyclists and teams are cleaning up voluntarily in order to woo fans and sponsors, but WADA is at a serious resource disadvantage compared to dedicated dopers. There's so much money on the table, they'd find a way to get the Pope pregnant if it meant a Tour win.
That said, I choose to believe Lance is clean. I believe he kicked everyone's ass because he's one of the most gifted cyclists on the planet, AND he had a monstrous work ethic and maniacal focus. Rider's with one of those characteristics are fairly common in the pro peloton. Riders that combine those two characteristics come along once in a generation. Merckx, Hinault, Armstrong.
Ulrich had a successful career by almost any measure, but how awesome could he have been if he'd followed a good coach and worked his ass off year round the way Lance did? How awesome could a hard-working but proletarian rider like Chris Carmichael have been if he'd had Ulrich's talent? Or even Basso's or Landis's?
FWIW, I believe Lance was on his way to an Ulrich career until cancer brought his priorities into focus, and he made it his number one goal (after recovering) to kick ass in the Tour. I believe he did it by taking full advantage of his enormous talent, and with the help of a top-tier coach, a master tactician, a deep-pockets sponsor, and a hand-picked team. Take any of those away and maybe he wins three Tours, or two, or zero. Who knows?
Call me naive, but I think there's more reason to believe he was clean than there is to believe he doped.
GB
mezza
05-11-08, 09:24 PM
I think Darth Vader and Leia got it on and Lance Armstrong was born.
So as not to draw attention to their illicit love their child was shipped off to earth to become a bike riding star. Therefore lance is maybe more machine than man and used the dark side of the force.
It makes as much sense as everything else said about this particular topic.
;)
Vrede
05-12-08, 10:26 AM
Lance is to cycling as Tiger is to golf. No typical American could have told you a cyclist name before Lance came around. Now he is a household name. The 95yr grandmother or 8yr little girl knows Lance but they couldn't tell you another rider's name to save their life.
There is no doubt in my mind he was doping. Geez look at the mountain stages during the Tour. I do believe that if he was ever found guilty for doping all faith would be lost in cycling, especially for Americans. Lance has made cycling noticed in America again, the federation can't afford to lose that.
UtahWasatch
05-12-08, 10:34 AM
Amazing that anybody could perform at that level with or without "supplements". But, under such scrutiny he was never tested positive so.... the guy must be of super natural powers!
Who is next best to win that many? Think Levi may get one?
Vrede
05-12-08, 10:34 AM
Lance competed in four tours before his cancer and didn't do anything much at all,then he returns from cancer,'trains' with Dr Ferrari and wins every tour from '99 to '05....hmmm sounds suspicious to me.Plus as stated before the rest of the field and his competition were doping so how could a rider that was getting his ass whooped by these guys a few years prior,then come along and kick their asses.
Just read this. Exactly what everyone over looks. He doped, sorry to say it, but he doped. When he first went to Europe with the American team they couldn't even keep up because the European riders were doping. Then the gets a "great coach" and all of a sudden he is blazing fast?
UtahWasatch
05-12-08, 12:28 PM
Dope or not, the guy was an animal in the mountains!
Ought to open the Tour, like those body building contests, have an "open" Class- anything goes and a "natural" division. Even still, may never see so dominant of a rider. Just my 2 cents
GernBlanston
05-12-08, 03:09 PM
Just read this. Exactly what everyone over looks. He doped, sorry to say it, but he doped. When he first went to Europe with the American team they couldn't even keep up because the European riders were doping. Then the gets a "great coach" and all of a sudden he is blazing fast?
He was faster than everyone else, so he MUST have doped? Seems pretty cynical, IMHO. Granted it's easy to be cynical about cycling these days.
Actually Carmichael has been his coach since he started cycling seriously in 1989. He just never listened to him till '98. And he did finish dead last in his first pro race, but he finished second the next time out.
As for Michele Ferrari, it looks bad having him in Lance's camp, but there is no evidence of malfeasance in his relationship with Lance. And if that's all it takes to be a doper, you can add Paolo Salvoldelli, Levi Leipheimer, Mario Cipollini, George Hincapie and others to the list of cheaters-by-association. And there are plenty of cheaters who DIDN'T need Ferrari's help.
And consider that Frankie Andreu, who admitted he had taken EPO in preparation for the Tour in 1999, did not allege the same about Lance, even as he and his wife tried and failed to convince a panel that Armstrong had admitted taking EPO in 1996.
If you look past the speculation and mud-slinging, there is no evidence he doped. He was the most tested cyclist in history, and not once did he have a positive result. The seven B sample positives from the '99 Tour were discredited by an independent investigation, and Lance was cleared. Bad science, they said, bad testing protocols, and bad behavior by the testing organization.
There is no proof he doped. There isn't even a credible allegation he doped. So maybe, just maybe, he didn't. Wouldn't that be cool?
GB
Paco97
05-13-08, 07:51 PM
According to his book, "its not about the bike" he was tested as a teenager for his V02 and its still the highest reading in all of texas to this day. Maybe he's just a freak of nature.