I noticed a new article today about Lance using EPO, just wondering what the cycling community feels about this
is it a conspiracy or is he guilty? Same thing w/Tyler Hamiltoncould it be the "vanishing twin" theory for why his sample was suspect or is he truly guilty? Are we simply in denial to think that these pros are innocent of the performance-enhancing charges?
It is my personal opinion that Lance and Tyler are not guilty. After reading much of the hype about both I don't think that the tests they are using to detect the presence of performance enhancing drugs are scientifically valid. But, it is just my humble opinion.
This was first posted in teh Tour de France section, but obviously applies to this discussion as well :
Lance Armstrong is a cheater - like most pro bike racers. And they have to if they want to win smthg at the pro level. Doping rules are 1. dont get caught 2. stay ahead of the testing technique. Good thing for us watchers is cheaters will get caught after a few years anyway as screening techniques develop further.
Armstrong was the strongest cyclist in the 7 tours he has won. He let everybody far behind. But his efforts are of no value really for us watchers. Anybody who has ridden on a steep hill cannot believe in a man making such a prodigious muscular effort and showing no sign of pain. Dont give the traditional 'he's a survivor' tag. Get this instead : he's a corticoid-filled cyclist. Painkillers are good for you in the Alps and the Pyrenees - especially when you want to win. That's not a worthy effort for us watchers because we do not use painkillers.
And to finish on this I'll say this : the hardest thing, the saddest and nevertheless the very possible : Armstrong like other cyclists (and many other sportsmen)didn't start using doping substances in 1999, but way before that. And knowing that, we can all wonder why did he did get struck by cancer in the first place. It's a hard thing to say and I too can say bravo to the fight he has put against testicular cancer. But doping is also about hormones and other strange stuff. That, we will never know for sure.
I don't know if Lance is innocent, and I don't know that he is a cheater, and neither does anyone else except Lance. He says he hasn't taken anything and I'm going to take him at his word. If you read the Active.com article written by the founder of this site, it said that Lance was beating world class tri-athletes when he was 15 and 16. Pretty remarkable, they were probably wondering how this punk kid could be so good at such an early age. I kind of doubt he had access to advance blood doping substances at that age. I also think that it is possible that Lance was prescribed drugs to boost his red blood cell count after finishing chemotherapy to put it back into a normal zone (I'm not a doctor!) But he won 7 straight and has anyone had to pee into a cup more than this guy? How did this newspaper get access to the lab results, and who matched up the sample numbers? I think it's just as plausible that they decided to get Lance.
When receiving information, you can only judge its reliability by looking at the quality of the source. I certainly do not regard L'Equippe as a reliable source of info about Lance. They go after everybody who makes French cyclists look bad. A few points in their article disturb me though:
1. EPO isn't stable in urine. It even degrades at -20 degrees.
2. How is it that they have super secret documents linking the number on the positive test to Lance Armstrong? Sounds like the Dan Rather debacle to me.
3. They expect Lance to defend himself even though no proof has been given and no charges have been filed.
4. They tested the "B" sample and their is no "C" sample.
As for Tyler, the whole chimera thing really does occur and it certainly destroys the "beyond a reasonable doubt" bit of due process.
Ok, let me try to understand. Lance is tested more than once per day during each of the tours. In addition, he's tested year-round at random by testers coming to his home at any hour of the day or night. All these were "official" tests. Now, I'm to understand that a French newspaper has conducted it's own testing of backup samples from 1999 ??? Come on !!!
I've worked for a French company for 25 years. I've experienced the French mentality here and in France. I can tell you from great experience; they don't like you! They don't like you and they don't like me.
And the Americans are dominating "their" sacred, beloved event. Add to that a tabloid French newspaper ??? Next, the paper will report that Martians took him away, spiced him up and planted him back on mother Earth.
Common guys, a French tabloid so-called newspaper ????
All I've gotta' say is...give me a break!!! Lance won 7 times! 7! He's a phenominal Athlete. To go back to '99 with a questionable, if that, urine sample is a bunch of bull! Give the guy credit for what he is and what he's done. This is way too much wasted energy on the part of the French press (and hey, I love the French being a French Major). But, to those nay sayers, I say...Let the guy retire in grace!
I want to be clear about a couple of things : I agree that Armstrong is a great sportsman. I first noticed him when he won the world championship in 1993 and I can say that I was very much impressed and liked the character. But my opinion changed as his arrogance gradually came out. I'll get back on this further in this post. He's a great sportsman with strong physical abilities. You need to have an extra-ordinary natural physical ability to perform in a such a way, even if you're juiced up to the eyeballs. So, yes he's a great athlete - but the hoax is taht he's not the character is pretending to be. Let me explain my view:
I first need to rectify one thing I said in my previous post : I said he's a cheater, well that's not really a problem. As I said in the earlier post, a lot of pro cyclists are cheating - so what can you expect. Instead of cheater I meant to use liar. And I am less willing to accept the fact that he's a liar - a liar that is pretending to be a hero and a great inspiring character. There is an arrogance that is unacceptable from Armstrong. Unfortunately. Armstrong would be more friendly, a warmer person, a humble human winner then I don't think he would be pursued so hotly. Now Armstrong is a winner who's requesting to be revered as an inspiring hero, crowning himself as the greatest cyclist ever. His insistance of being considered clean sounds so obviously phony that cannot be accepted from a pretentious person. And tha's part of the reason why he's so harrassed.
Now about the actions of the Journal l'Equipe, well I think it is clear that they have a purpose. Going after Armstrong yes, but also I think (hope) forcing the pro cycling (and pro sport to a larger extent) to let down the mask. Le Journal l'Equipe is not a tabloid. Not anymore that the Washington Post was in to Nixon's Watergate to give a clear example.
Why go back to 1999 : because EPO was not detectable back then. Why EPO can not be found afterwards in Armstrong's samples : because he's smart enough not to use a detectable substance. Are they clean ? Future will tell and screening techniques develop further.
There is and will always be a big divide between believers and non-believers. Is there a solution : yes, I think so. The day Armstrong comes out and humbly says the obvious : 'Yes, I have enhanced my physical abilities by using some substances' then he will be more widely accepted. Not because of the fallen hero image that everybody seems to love (especially in Europe). But because he won't be fighting against the obvious with such an arrogant sneer. That's his real fault in the whole matter to me.
Hey Billypot, I don't much like arrogant people either (like the French!) but that's not a reason to accuse someone of something you know absolutely nothing about.
You wrote, "Armstrong would be more friendly, a warmer person, a humble human winner then I don't think he would be pursued so hotly."
You also wrote, "But because he won't be fighting against the obvious with such an arrogant sneer. That's his real fault in the whole matter to me."
It's very clear after studying your words. It's like, "I don't like his attitude so he's got to be a cheater ... no wait, he's a liar."
Last, your "solution" is ridiculous. Sure, the noisy, negative public will always believe the bad stories - won't they?
Get over the arrogance and accept it; he's the best. But hey, if it wasn't him, it would be someone else now wouldn't it? Oh, but that means that person would have to be "juiced to the eyes" too, right? Seems endless, huh?
But we agree about the arrogance! I recall Muhammad Ali, another gifted guy, and his extreme arrogance. But it was fun watching him kick *** just like Lance did.
It's true it is endless : believers and non-believers in Armstrong will stand firmly on their positions.
M.Ali was different - he was also leading a fight against racism and his arrogance was humourous. He was and still is a warm, friendly character.
My view and one of many is that Armstrong is a cheater (like a majority of the pro cyclists). But being a cheater in Cheating Land is no big sin. And cheating in Cheating Land does not prevent him from having top-level physical abilities in the first place. But claiming to be clean is a lie and insisting on it is revolting to some people who know how much doping is a part of daily life in top sport, cycling included.
Believers will say he's the best and that's it. Non-believers will always wonder how strong he would have been without the 'enhancement' and won't find his results as impressive as they look. And yes, that's endless.
The French are just looking for excuses. We bailed them out in world war two and they are anti American.
This Tour is like our Super Bowl.
They are just poor or sore loosers.
I heard they saw toothpaste, deoderant and mouthwash on Lances dresser.
Please, folks, let's not be so harsh on the French. That's not helping anything. I have a french girlfriend and other very good friends from France. It's not healthy to hold all citizens of an entire country accountable for the actions &/or sentiments of a few. If you've ever traveled Europe as an American, as I have, maybe you understand the treachery of being held personally accountable for the actions of your government. Also, It's been almost 60 years since WWII. Let it go.
As far as the enhancements &/or doping allegations, this is the case for champions in every sport ...Look at Barry Bonds (greatest baseball player of all time and never tested positive). It's not just Lance .. and it's not just Cycling. Let's all realize that everyone wants to take a shot at the Winner. Lance is the Greatest Cyclist of All Time and that's that. Let those who want to grumble grumble ... who are they anyways?!
"Lance Armstrong is the greatest cyclist of all time and that's that"?
I don't think so. Eddy Merckx is the greatest cyclist of all time. He also had the coolest nickname of all time, The Cannibal.
He won the Tour de France 5 times.
He won the Giro d'Italia 5 times.
He also won the Vuelta a Espana which makes him 1 of only 4 riders to win all three of the Grand Tours.
He is also 1 of only 2 cyclists to win the Triple Crown, the Tour de France, the Giro d'Italia, and the World Cycling Championship IN THE SAME YEAR.
He won the Super Prestige Pernod International (based on an entire season) 7 consecutive years.
He held the one hour world record.
In the 1969 Tour de France, he won the Yellow jersey (overall), the Green jersey (sprinter), and the Polka dot jersey (climber), if the White jersey category had been in existence, he would have won it too since he was only 24. Most cyclists don't peak until they are in their 30's.
Eddy raced 1582 times and won 445 of them.
And I KNOW he didn't use performance enhancing drugs back then because they didn't exist.
Hell, Lance isn't even the greatest American cyclist ever, that honor is still held by Greg Lemond.
turbomatic wrote:But we agree about the arrogance! I recall Muhammad Ali, another gifted guy, and his extreme arrogance. But it was fun watching him kick *** just like Lance did.++
There's a saying where I come from.... "it ain't braggin' if you can DO it "
Ali and Lance could .