Recovery is implicit in "performance" in the context of a multistage event like the Tour. We all understand that peak output on any given day is meaningless if you have nothing left for the remaining ~20 days. I was disagreeing with your statement that " when you reach the highest, elitist, most fit physical condition you can be, EPO doesn't actually offer any advantages" - clearly EPO offers significant advantages to cyclists at the top end of the sport, otherwise, they wouldn't keep taking it.

Shenanigans galore. This is why I internet

It would be funny to ride alongside him, ask him about his bike, then talk about yours- 'Hey, you ever heard of this Lemond brand? beautiful bikes, and a shame they went away. I wonder what happened?'

I met him at RAGBRAI. It was brief. Just seemed like a dbag. I laughed when I found out we were going to try to meet him because I had no interest in it...so that probably clouded my experience a bit too.

I'll be sure to devote more effort to finding satisfactory results for you.

Aint it the way ...

I agree. If it were just doping and lying about it, that could be forgivable. But the way he went after those who threatened to expose him is not.

Guess he had to do something,
when every one demanded all the prize money back ,
due to his Doping Fraud.

Human performance is complicated, and there can certainly be placebo effects as well as competition effects. And, some riders will do anything they think will get them a leg up on the competition.

The "micro dosing" that was in the news a while ago may well be a placebo effect.

But, for the regular increase HCT by EPO, Blood Transfusions, etc, the theory is strong, and appears to be borne out by actual on the road testing.

These are extraordinary athletes with or without drugs. But, perhaps just a little better with drugs.

Tyler Hamilton's book The Secret Race is a pretty decent description of what motivated at least one rider get into doping, and of the doping routines used by US Postal in it's various incarnations. Certainly in the case of US Postal, the doping was backed up by comprehensive crit testing etc to monitor the biological effects of the doping. Michele Ferrari may have been an unscrupulous cheat, or cheat-facilitator, but he clearly know how to administer dope effectively

Exactly right, imo.

He Made Bicycling Great Again.

Bigly.

He did? Never heard of this Bigly bloke. You sure you don't mean Tom Simpson?

Should I edit it to read: "On bike performance", or "any on bike advantages?" I can do that you know...

I'm pretty sure most people understand "recovery" to mean "off bike", but it seems I am mistaken, 'cause, you know...Bike Forums.

I'm not interested in splitting hairs, but you knock yourself out

If I'm correctly recalling one anecdote, this incident in the 1994 TdF time trial -- when Indurain didn't merely catch and pass Armstrong but did a close brush-by pass to intimidate Armstrong -- was the main incentive for Armstrong to go from occasional and erratic doping to a systematic, nearly bulletproof approach.


Later, in 2001, Armstrong did the same thing to Ullrich.


And even on a level playing field without doping, Armstrong still would have been considered a bully and tyrant as a team leader by some people, and respected for those qualities by other more pragmatic participants and observers. It's in the nature of some highly competitive super alpha types. In particular it's what people look for in football team leaders and coaches. Doping doesn't create superachievers. It only enhances their existing natures.

The only difference is that Armstrong probably would not have thoroughly dominated the TdF for so long. He'd have performed more like normal humans before EPO -- some good days, some bad, relying on strategy and clock management to eke out narrower stage wins and placements rather than overwhelming the field.

USPS was wanting a bigger piece of the EU to US shipping business so this was a European marketing play. dave

BTW, people who actually know Armstrong as a friend or regular acquaintance describe him as a good guy. But local friends who've ridden with him on event rides mostly describe him as aloof.

That doesn't surprise me. For years he's been dogged and harassed by journalists and race observers, a pretty regular barrage of catcalls. And by all accounts he just appears to ignore them and doesn't respond. In at least one comment he acknowledges that he deserves the abuse and accepts it as a consequence of his actions. As long as it doesn't result in actual physical attacks he seems to accept it and shrug it off.

But that's also an oddly common quirk among some narcissistic overachievers. There's no bad publicity. It's better to be talked about than ignored.

There's no other way the battleship Lance Armstrong can go. Grab an oar, bailing bucket or lifejacket. Or stay ashore.

To all of the 'holier than thou,' no one will ever know if LA would have been just as successful if he and all of his competitors were not taking performance enhancing measures. To single LA out says more about his accusers than his crime, which pretty much was winning 7 TdF's. If LA had hung up the bike at say... 5 wins, there never would have been a prosecution (persecution?).

Yeah, poor little persecuted Lance. If only he had quit earlier, he wouldn't have been exposed as a cheater. Clearly, he's the victim here.

your posts continue to deliver. Pure entertainment every time.

ok, sure while it cant be proven what would have happened had he not doped, it can be very reasonably guessed.
people have performed with and without doping and been measured. Their results are consistently worse without the help.

its absurd to say or even suggest the results would have been the same had he not doped.

but again- for many it wasn't the doping as much as it was the continued denial and attacks on others.
singling out Lance doesnt say more about the accusers thsn lance. That's bs. Lance destroyed the reputation and livelihood of others due to the lying and deserves all the junk that has come at him since he finally admitted to doping and lying for all the yesrs.
Had he fessed up 15 years ago and admitted to cheating, he would be remembered differently- more along the lines of all the others who were guilty of doping. But he chose to go scorched earth and made himself a bigger target.

but keep trying to frame him as a victim in all this. Brilliant***

Read any book "about" him, not "by" him, and you will determine very quickly that he deserves none of our respect or admiration.

I don't know the guy, however I sure did not like him for a few years. Looking back at things I am willing to forgive and forget. He made a huge mistake, a really, really big one and has asked for forgiveness. I will give him that just as I have been forgiven many times over. I hope those he attempted to destroy in his cover-up have reached the same conclusion. It is the past, and cannot be changed. Just let it go and we will all be happier and more content.

I agree, but I think the point is that he probably would have won multiple tours if he wasn't doping and nobody else was doping.