wagathon

Oh?

(from wiki)

Physical attributes

He is near but not at the top aerobically, having a VO2 max of 83.8 mL/kg/min — much higher than the average person (40-50) but not as high as that of some other elite cyclists, such as Miguel Indurain (88.0, although reports exist that Indurain tested at 92-94) or Greg LeMond (92.5).[2] His heart is 30% larger than average; however, an enlarged heart is a common trait for many other athletes. He has a resting heart rate of 32-34 beats per minute with a max heart rate at 201 bpm.[3] Armstrong's most unusual attribute may be his low lactate levels. During intense training, the levels of most racers range from 12 μL/kg to as much as 20 μL/kg; Armstrong is below 6 μL/kg. The result is that less lactic acid accumulates in Armstrong's system, therefore it is possible that he feels less fatigue from severe efforts, and this may contribute to his ability to sustain the same level of physical effort as other elite racers with less fatigue and faster recovery times. Some theorize that his high pedaling cadence is designed to take advantage of this low lactate level. In contrast, other cyclists — like Jan Ullrich — rely on their anaerobic capacity, pushing a larger gear at a lower rate. Further improvements in Armstrong's physical attributes and performance have been attributed to training-induced increases in his muscular efficiency indicating changes in muscle myosin type.[4]

bac

He doped ... but so did/does most every other rider. Perhaps he was better at hiding it, and better at doing the right drug at the right time. Given the amount of doping in sports in general - it's par for the course.

... Brad

idig

I want to believe that he didn't, but it is difficult. I definitely think he pushed the envelope of what is and isn't legal. If he did cheat, then I believe that the entire sport did. USPS/Disco just did it better.

wagathon

Sort of like ... all US Senators did, or all presidents of countries, or all furniture movers . . . all taggers, or all fighter pilots, or all abalone divers. all pool plasterers, linebackers, soccer players, tree trimmers, masons . . . ?

bradyy

not at all.
you dont compete in any sport for your entire life, be tested as many times as this man, and out of no where test positive for steriods, the only time lance ever took a "performance enhancer" was during his chemo to boost red blood cells,after his chemo he obviously enever touched anyhting o that sorse again. i think this topic was brought out on jealously, a just being pissed off on someone from a country of, sorry, but normally underdog cyclist. for a european to see an american cyclist win the argueably, hardest race in the world, is like an american seeing a danish team beat them in foot ball, or a Brazilian soccer team lose to the U.S, or France even in the Fifa World Cup. it is reasonable to see these people upset the way they are at some outsider from an inexpereinced Cycling Country come and win like that, but it is out rageous that these questions would be asked about one of the tughest men in the world.
obviosuly,
i highly support the fact of Lance Armstrong being drug-free.

Burningman

"he obviously never touched anything of that sort again"

Why would you think that?

I think Lance could have played the whole thing better...

He over shot and won 7 by "just riding my bike a lot".....

His always made it sound as if he could jump on a bike any time put a few more miles in on the weekends and win 8 and 9....Ego...ya,sure...but if you've got 10 doped up guys on your ass it shouldn't be that simple

To play this thing right he should have won 5,to honor all the other 5 timers before him..

Let one go to Ulrich(spellings wrong)...then be the under dog and fight back for 6..then retire

That is smooth,that is a story book....that would have taken some of the eyes off him from the cycling community.

wagathon

I think you've got it: "... by 'just riding my bike a lot.....," i.e., LA had a monomaniacal preoccupation. That pretty much explains it: LA had a monumental pertinaciousness with the Tour (a trait that may have helped him beat cancer).

My guess is, there's only one person in the world who knows if LA could have gone for eight or nine or ... ? But, I don't think LA has any plans to come back like Rocky VIII; and, even if LA did make a comeback, and tested negative another 10 or twenty more times ... will the French cycling establishment continue to insinuate guilt, savage LA's accomplishments, and pander to those who believe the seriousness of the allegations--proof or no proof--is the only thing that is important? Of course!

embankmentlb

I think Armstrong was exposed to some cutting edge & experimental drugs in his battle with cancer. Drugs that people outside of the cancer treatment field probably know nothing about. What if he used those same drugs to boost his performance? Is there a test for that? I suggest reading this article.
https://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-doping-dilemma

texastwister

the guy is a monster! look at the drafting!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iqwA...eature=related

bac

Really?



There are dozens upon dozens of other examples.

... Brad

Stallionforce

Le Tour by Wheatcroft is an excellent primer for the Tour, and will educate you in the corruption inherent in the sport from its very inception. Initial Tour riders relied on morphine and alcohol, some of them taking in wine on their 300 to 400km stages and subsequently passing out on the road, crashing into roadside ditches. Other riders were sabotaged with nails on the road, some even kidnapped.

It was a circus show, a freak show, enshrouded in unethical practices, meant to sell newspapers; an event resulting from a disagreement between Henri Desgrange and the editorial board of the French sporting newspaper Le Velo. Desgrange invented the Tour as a freakshow to drum up attention for his new, rival newspaper. The event was at that time literally a "boucle" or belt, or ring around France, hence the 400km stages.

It was humanly impossible, and the riders 'supplemented' to survive. There is an anecdote in Wheatcroft's book of the Bobet brothers celebrating a stage win by staying up all night in their hotel rooms and sprinkling cocaine in their eyes. And need I mention Tom Simpson?

Given this legacy of this superhuman spectacle, dopage has embedded itself in the culture of cycling, more deeply than in other sports. Do I believe Armstrong doped? Yes, of course I do. Do I believe his contemporaries doped? Of course I do. There are still ways of doping that are undetectable, including the most powerful form -- micro-dosing of packed blood. Only Phonak could be so dumb as to screw that up and switch bags.

However, I also believe that Armstrong is a freak of nature, and given a 'clean' race, he would still be a favourite and a sometime winner. I also believe in 'innocent until proven guilty' and Lance is smart, very smart, as is Bruyneel.

I do, however, believe that with all the revelations and all the scrutiny the sport is under, most importantly from sponsors, that the culture of doping is changing -- the sport is cleaner. Look at this year's Giro. Di Luca with the help of a magnificent sacrifice from Salvoldelli, rides a "killer" stage 19, but the following two days he is wrecked, and loses massive time. That would not have happened 5 or 6 years ago. In single-day races, we are seeing less mass sprints and more breakaway victories. It gives me faith that the strongest are more likely to win.

Rollfast

See, kids, Grandma and Grandpa were evil and cutthroat too! They just didn't have the bomb or the Internet!