Rowan

Was Pantani's death ruled natural, suicide, accidental, or from the effects of doping?

Jed19

Cocaine overdose was the official word.

Racer Ex 

Barricading yourself in a hotel room with a giant bag of blow and all the speed dial numbers on your cell phone programed to drug dealers might be considered suicide. Or just another day in the life of Charlie Sheen.

goagain

Very disappointed in Armstrong. Apparently he treated his peers and friends horribly and was a vindictive person.

Rowan

I read at the time Pantani was suffering from severe depression. That might do extraodinary things to a person's perspective. And that depression may have come from PED use. It's all speculation now, and he's not here to answer it.

paperbackbiker

I was thinking of Pantani after LA's demise. Can't shake that famous Alpe d' Ues(SP?) climb. I've watched that many times and now it's just two juicers making asses of themselves. It makes me wonder what will the course of LA's life look like compared to his. And wouldn't you think, that after Pantani's crazy death and disgrace, that this would have had some effect on Lance? No, the guy kept on doping...

xjken99

Looks like he was (is) a gigantic a-hole, vindictive, ruthless and a win at all cost professional. Pretty much sounds like most professional athletes at the top of their game. All the testimony is their word against his, regardless of how much of it there may be. It sounds like a witch hunt to me, show me a failed drug test. Now the French are taking away his Tour trophies even though he never failed their test. So I wonder if they are doing this to save face without admitting their state of the art testing was so beatable. I wonder what their percentage of participants who were doping but passed their test would be over the seven tours he won.

Mansram01

I'm more disappointed with the UCI and this doping era in cycling. To blame it on Armstrong for being a mean guy is kinda ridiculous. How do you explain these guys doping AFTER 2005? Like Levi. And now Cadel has ties to Dr. Ferrari? Strictly professional, of course.

Trevor98

we all know LA is extremely vindictive but is he willing to blow up the whole system- the USAC, UCI, USOC, IOC, USADA, WADA and the ASO could all be ruined if he chooses to go on the attack. He doesn't even have to admit to anything as the mere allegations of them willfully turning a blind eye to his cheating would likely ruin them let alone accusations that they helped him cover it up. This scandal smells bigger than just him and his teammates (USADA already implicated the UCI in the matter) so it would be easy for LA to push them all over the edge without really admitting anything.

The public would eat it up as LA is bigger than the sport and people love scandal. Mere innuendo would go really far as people would be more inclined to believe that he had powerful help than that simply outsmarted all those organizations by being that much better at cheating than they were at catching dopers- a rhetorical question by LA insinuating that the UCI demanded bribes to look the other way (his "donations" have always been seen that way by many) would be devastating to those organizations' budgets and wouldn't, at this point, do him any more harm.

Better yet, if LA is willing to admit his doping then all bets are off and the damage to the Olympic movement would be overwhelming- does anyone doubt he'd lie to bring them all down in retribution for his own downfall? Would banned and bitter former Olympic athletes assert their own false allegations to pile on and get another 15 minutes of fame?

I'm sure the posturing politicians would jump on the issue for political gain, using the receipt of so much public money by these organizations to justify their very public "hearings"- just look at the show they made over the MLB's juicing history with barely a justification. Oh yes, that could get very entertaining so at least we'd have something to watch with the death of professional cycling (I can't see sponsors paying for this sport anymore).

They're throwing LA under the bus for excelling at their game while they made money, it would be awesome for him to beat them at the blame game too and they have a hell of a lot more to lose than him now. On the other hand, I don't think he has to do anything for some of them to be ruined by this scandal.

bikerjp

https://www.montrealgazette.com/sport...086/story.html

Furthermore, he went to great lengths to avoid being tested. Not "failing" a drug test is not evidence you didn't dope. Only evidence that you didn't get caught. LA paid big bucks for the best doctors and tech to pass tests.

EDIT: someone posted a link a while back to an interview with a researcher who did some of the retesting of samples and talked about how they developed the tests. Anyone have a link to that interview?

Homebrew01

I don't think it's fair of you to accuse Lance of being a witch. Do you have proof ?

xjken99

My personal bottom line is that I do not care what LA did any more than what any other athlete has done. There are a lot more pressing problems facing mankind to get all caught up in worshiping these people.

bikerjp

https://deoxy.org/emperors.htm

bike56

Very insightful and you may be right.This could be much bigger than Lance

roadwarrior

So someone has a clue what you railing about, might you be referring to the 2000 Tour, Mont Ventoux stage?

Pantani died of a cocaine overdose. He dove into coke because of depression. He was booted from the Giro due to a high hematocrit...back in those days there was no EPO test.

islandboy

Give me a minute, I cannot remember witch test he passed.

Fleabiscuit

I have no problem with the stiff sentence handed down to Armstrong. There is sufficient evidence to suggest he doped and he appears to be paying a stiff price both financially and to his reputation. If they are going to vacate his titles, it is only fair that they vacate the titles of ALL of the former TDF champions who have been busted for doping or who have admitted to doping during their careers. This list would include (not in order):

Anquetil - admitted to doping
Merckx - tested positive several times for banned substances
Fignon
Roche - suspected EPO user
Ullrich - doper
Pantani - doper
Riis - admitted EPO user
Zoetemelk - tested positive
Thevenet - admitted doper
Aimar - tested positive, not during TDF
Contador -

If you retroactively vacate the titles of all of the dopers and suspected TDF dopers, the list gets short, REALLY short. Who knows, maybe some former teammates of the "clean guys" will eventually come forward and the list will be even shorter, down to a handful of names. Armstrong may have been an accomplished doper but he didn't invent doping. I'm in favor of retroactively vacating all of his titles, as long as they do the same for all of the other riders who commited the exact same offense. Pro cycling's history is like a rotten onion, the closer you get to the core, the more it stinks.

tagaproject6

You don't need a minute nor a witch test. You need witch witnesses.

Nachoman

Hearsay and heresy.

merlinextraligh

he turned me into a newt.




















I got better.

Keith99

Spoken like a true Lance fanboy.

Commodus

What a ridiculous argument.

bgilchrist

Oh, I get it.

Only LA ever doped and any statement that someone else doped and should also be held accountable for their actions makes you a fanboy. Riiigghhhhht. :roll:

Skewer

Here is a psychiatrist's take on the entire situation. He makes quite a bit out of Lance's father abandoning Lance when he was two, as well as Lance not having a relationship with his mother's subsequent husband. He says this drove Lance to race for acceptance and adulation at all costs. I don't know what to make of it since I am not a psychiatrist and did not have that burden. It sounds plausible.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/...nd-face-truth/

Rowan

There might be merit in what Fleabiscuit says, but unfortunately for Lance, they can get him because the rules state they can (well, at least some of it).

And to be fair, they did get some of those guys. Whether the penalties were commensurate with the wrongdoing, that's up for argument, too. But you'd have to include in your argument the level of success they gained out of doping, and the scope of the organisation involved in the doping -- and that's where Armstrong has gone wrong.

To me, it this whole thing is much like comparing the small-time meth dealer in clubs, with the kingpin who has a kitchen producing the stuff in bulk and distributing it around the country -- while portraying himself as a slick and successful businessman donating cash to a cancer charity.