Lance Armstrong - Finally The Truth ?

[Tyrone Biggums]

Read david millers book that will answer any questions you have. They where all at it even lance im afraid!

I'm always skeptical of riders who've been banned for drugs coming out and pointing the finger at others. It all feels a bit too much like a childish retort that "It's not fair, I got in trouble but all of the others were doing it too".

Maybe Armstrong did take performance enhancing drugs. But for the highest profile athlete in the sport to avoid being detected for so long after so many hundreds and hundreds of tests to me suggests he can't have been on something the whole time.

 

[Pondicherry]

the very best don't need to cheat,bobet,anquetil,merckx,hinault,lemond,fignon,indurain and of course armstrong

armstrong just happened to be the "best" of the best

Anquetil admitted taking amphetamines, Merckx failed doping tests three times and Indurain tested positive for Salbutamol. Lemond has alluded that Armstrong took drugs and Armstrong has alluded that Lemond took EPO.

 

[porkypie]

I'm always skeptical of riders who've been banned for drugs coming out and pointing the finger at others. It all feels a bit too much like a childish retort that "It's not fair, I got in trouble but all of the others were doing it too".

Maybe Armstrong did take performance enhancing drugs. But for the highest profile athlete in the sport to avoid being detected for so long after so many hundreds and hundreds of tests to me suggests he can't have been on something the whole time.

Its not about pointing the finger, And he does say he can not say for sure that lance was at it, but to beat them riders who where using it you had to be on it. He claims it was impossible to compete with them if you was not on it. There are ways that you can make sure its out of your systerm before you got tested. There where plenty of dodgy doctors around at the time as well. I always thought that lance was clean but after reading millers book i doubt he was. His not pointing the finger honest its all about the culture of cycling. Read it mate its a good book. You may still think that lance was clean you may not.

 

[Horton's halftime iceberg]

Having watched cycling for many years, what I find interesting is how clean the sport is now looking, having torn itself apart for many years many of the old guard that supported the doping are now gone and a new guard of teams appear to be in the ascendancy.

Most teams adopt passport testing and are happy to show the on going results to journalists, In fact our new BHA team doctor who appears to be making an amazing difference has brought these new methods in from the HTC team. The teams like SKY, Garmin, Europcar have all shown you can win without doping and this inflences all the teams as much as testing.

Plenty of riders have been caught and admitted to taking drugs and have never won a thing - its a tough sport and for years it was seen you could never win without the aid of recovery drugs to allow you to perform over multiple days.\

Its a brilliant sport to watch and as the Cavs and Wiggens take over more and more cyclists will win using modern fitness techniques and technical advancements to gain the edge rather than doping. I believe many other sports, football, tennis, Golf to name a few have a far longer way to go in cleaning up drugs cheats.

If Lance is guilty it will out, it will hurt as he has always been adamant that the illness got him the new body shape that enabled him to win and repeatedly denied doping. As a personality he is not popular so makes enemies, he will be in for a big fall if evidence is produced, until then the Jurys out for me.

 

[Stat Brother]

Its a brilliant sport to watch and as the Cavs and Wiggens take over more and more cyclists will win using modern fitness techniques and technical advancements to gain the edge rather than doping. I believe many other sports, football, tennis, Golf to name a few have a far longer way to go in cleaning up drugs cheats.

There's a fair few, on here, (unless I'm only ever arguing with the same person) who don't believe an illegal performance enhancing drug programme, with massive results, applies to their sport.

 

[vegster]

Mind you, having a testicle removed must surely mean you gain an unfair advantage. On those saddles when you are pushing it, your nuts must end up slapping together like those clackerballs. But if you only have one..

 

[Tooting Gull]

If half of what Armstrong says in his book is true (and yes, obviously that is one-sided but you'd expect some insight) there are reasons people wanted to get him.

He was shafted by his French team while stricken with cancer. Then he made fools of them by coming back and not just competing but winning. Some of them couldn't handle that at all and started a whispering campaign.

Then you have drug cheats, who were not only caught but jealous of his success, whose word I don't rely on and I'm not sure a court would.

And finally you have the fact that the admission of EPO and changing the levels of red blood cells formed an important part of his cancer treatment, not hidden, but very much out in the open. That was to live, not to win races.

I'm the first to admit I haven't got a clue about the real truth of it, but there a lot of people in France who didn't/don't like Armstrong, and I take that into account.

 

[Horton's halftime iceberg]

Very good article on the BBC website yesterday about Europe's relationship with Armstrong

BBC Sport - Lance Armstrongs Tour de France legacy tainted

 

[Tooting Gull]

Very good article on the BBC website yesterday about Europe's relationship with Armstrong

BBC Sport - Lance Armstrongs Tour de France legacy tainted

Good article, very fair. Even without drugs, Armstrong was a bit of a Michael Schumacher/Tiger Woods/Stephen Hendry figure, feared, respected but not loved. So the French have willingly joined in the speculation.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

I am not saying that Lance Armstrong used drugs BUT what Lance wants everyone to believe is that despite having had testicular, brain and lung cancer he was able to win probably the toughest sporting contest (Tour de France) seven times in a row despite the fact that most of his competitors at the time WERE taking performance enhancing drugs.

He is either by a massive margin the greatest athlete in all eternity or another cyclist who was taking performance enhacing drugs like most of the others at that time.

This is the point, isn't it? That we're expected to believe a man who has just recovered from near death due to cancer, suddenly and without any hint in his pre-cancer cycling career, manages to win in a sport where we're led to believe almost every other rider was on drugs.

The sad thing is, it took them years to find a test for EPO/blood doping. Even now, I find it difficult to believe that there aren't new kinds of drugs or doping out there that the authorities simply can't detect yet. Who has the greater incentive? The cyclists to cheat and to avoid detection, or the authorities to bust them?

 

[Tooting Gull]

As someone with a relatively new-found respect for the Tour de France (stemming mainly from driving up Alpe d'Huez in a car, and thinking 'these people are insane') I feel genuinely sorry for proper fans of cycling with this always hanging over the sport. It is a great sport, and winning the Tour is or should be one of THE great sporting achievements of the year.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

This is the point, isn't it? That we're expected to believe a man who has just recovered from near death due to cancer, suddenly and without any hint in his pre-cancer cycling career, manages to win in a sport where we're led to believe almost every other rider was on drugs.

The sad thing is, it took them years to find a test for EPO/blood doping. Even now, I find it difficult to believe that there aren't new kinds of drugs or doping out there that the authorities simply can't detect yet. Who has the greater incentive? The cyclists to cheat and to avoid detection, or the authorities to bust them?

It's quite common that after women have babies their sporting performances can improve so is reported.

Are we to believe that's then actually down to performance enhancing drugs?

A lot of being a successful sports person is how you learn to deal with pain. After having cancer i'd think the pain experienced during a bike ride would seem insignificant.

Perhaps no different to a woman after she's gone through child birth. Except the woman wont be linked to drugs.

 

[teaboy]

If Lance was clean and wanted to prove it he could publish in full his biological passport for the last 3 years.

He part-published it some time ago (2009, I think) after the Giro, but then pulled the original and republished one with different values. When you add this to his continued association with Dr Farrari (who also assisted Marco Pantani, amongst others) and the number of team-mates that tested positive while riding for him and you can see why many people are very suspicious.

Personally I feel sport is better off without him and he ego.

 

[Stat Brother]

This is the point, isn't it? That we're expected to believe a man who has just recovered from near death due to cancer, suddenly and without any hint in his pre-cancer cycling career, manages to win in a sport where we're led to believe almost every other rider was on drugs.

He was World Champion (a la Cav now) pre cancer.

The sad thing is, it took them years to find a test for EPO/blood doping. Even now, I find it difficult to believe that there aren't new kinds of drugs or doping out there that the authorities simply can't detect yet. Who has the greater incentive? The cyclists to cheat and to avoid detection, or the authorities to bust them?

That's why cycling has a biological passport.
Any test at any time can be meaningless/explained away.
With the passport 12 months (it might even be 3 years) of tests are there for the authorities to see.
Making 'spikes' easier to spot.

 

[Stat Brother]

If Lance was clean and wanted to prove it he could publish in full his biological passport for the last 3 years.

He part-published it some time ago (2009, I think) after the Giro, but then pulled the original and republished one with different values. When you add this to his continued association with Dr Farrari (who also assisted Marco Pantani, amongst others) and the number of team-mates that tested positive while riding for him and you can see why many people are very suspicious.

Personally I feel sport is better off without him and he ego.

The problem with Lance is for every argument he puts forward can be countered.
The biggest problems in Lance's defence is Dr Ferrari Michele Ferrari - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, who to say is tainted would be an understatement.
The other being HIS team.
There was no democracy there, it's Lance's way or the highway.
To then have x amount of his team test positive or admit drug use, has to look bad for Lance, because of the way he ran his team.

 

[Seagull58]

Nobody has provided once piece of evidence to show how he, one of the most famous athletes in the world in one of the most scrutinized sports in the world somehow made it through all of those TDF years without returning a positive swab or missed a drug test.

It's worth keeping in mind that plenty of cyclists were caught out during that time.

The same way all the others did it; they control very carefully when they take the drugs to ensure they keep ahead of the testers. Occasionally someone gets it wrong and they get caught. Drug taking has been part of the TdF since the 1920's when they took Cocaine.

 

[Horton's halftime iceberg]

The same way all the others did it; they control very carefully when they take the drugs to ensure they keep ahead of the testers. Occasionally someone gets it wrong and they get caught. Drug taking has been part of the TdF since the 1920's when they took Cocaine.

Lance has been one of the most tested sportspeople. Christmas Day an example of when testers would arrive on his doorstep well out of season and take samples. If he took them it would be more about masking them but again the tests give a good idea of who is doing this.

Passports are the way forward and re testing samples as new methods become available. If riders like Wiggo and CAV ever test positive we might as well go home, but most cycling fans have a good idea of who is clean, and often who may not be.

 

[the right footed denilson]

He was World Champion (a la Cav now) pre cancer.

And youngest ever TDF stage winner well before he had cancer, so the argument his ability only emerged post cancer just isn't true- he had phenomenal potential.

 

[Triggaaar]

I am not saying that Lance Armstrong used drugs BUT what Lance wants everyone to believe is that despite having had testicular, brain and lung cancer he was able to win probably the toughest sporting contest (Tour de France) seven times in a row despite the fact that most of his competitors at the time WERE taking performance enhancing drugs.

He is either by a massive margin the greatest athlete in all eternity or another cyclist who was taking performance enhacing drugs like most of the others at that time.

A very good point.

This is the point, isn't it? That we're expected to believe a man who has just recovered from near death due to cancer, suddenly and without any hint in his pre-cancer cycling career, manages to win in a sport where we're led to believe almost every other rider was on drugs.

The sad thing is, it took them years to find a test for EPO/blood doping. Even now, I find it difficult to believe that there aren't new kinds of drugs or doping out there that the authorities simply can't detect yet. Who has the greater incentive? The cyclists to cheat and to avoid detection, or the authorities to bust them?

It completely ruins sport. I have no intention of cheering winners that are probably on drugs. That's why I like skill sports, where drugs aren't much of an advantage.

the very best don't need to cheat

Says who? In a sport like cycling, if the cyclists that aren't quite at the top all cheat, they will beat those that should be at the top. Who says that none of those in your list took drugs?

 

[Stat Brother]

A very good point.
It completely ruins sport. I have no intention of cheering winners that are probably on drugs.

Make your mind up.
Either you were cheering on Spain, last night, or not.

Anyway it's not like you to pop up before the final decision.
I thought it was more your style to wait till it was all over, before saying 'see I told you so'.