PDA

View Full Version : Lance Armstrong - EPO



Pages : [1] 2

ben
31st August 2005, 07:12 AM
So.. Lance Armstrong has apparently tested postive to EPO. Anyone else suprised by this?

AndyP
31st August 2005, 07:17 AM
Is that the allegation by a French newspaper or has it escalated further?

I heard a cycling journalist on SEN while I was in Melbourne saying that it was unlikely that it would have been in his system for performance enhancing, and that the French papers have always been against him.

If it is the case, then he loses quite a bit of respect.

McMw
31st August 2005, 08:41 AM
story came out 2 weeks ago - nothing much till now...probably nothing...

Fishman Dan
31st August 2005, 10:50 AM
Suspect way that it's all come about too.

The samples were allegedly anonymous, and how does a newspaper reporter get access to these things?

I think with his career now over, this is a non-issue. I have no doubt that cycling at every level is rife with drugs (worth than swimming), but too late to tarnish Armstrong.

Note that 1 particular contestant in the Tour this year got arrested by French Customs mid-race for importing drugs illegally into the country - not found out and DQ'd by event organisers. That in itself tells me that the powers that be in cycling turn a blind eye to it all.

AndyP
31st August 2005, 01:13 PM
I heard that it was from a frozen sample taken from 2000 or something. Apparently they didn't have the technology to test for EPO then.

Fishman Dan
31st August 2005, 02:00 PM
I heard it's from the 1999 race..

But the suss factor is who gained access to them, and how.

Jarro
31st August 2005, 02:22 PM
there's too many of us 69'er ....... we wont be surpressed :P

jaster
31st August 2005, 08:09 PM
It is from the 1999 Tour, I personally think it is a French witch hunt as they are PO that a Yank who hates speaking french has won there beloved "Tour" 7 times in a row. Fishy has it correct...the tests are anonymous and there is no way without being "Framed" these samples could have been linked back to Lance. 6 others apparently tested positive as well but Lance was the only one named....whom :-k Sounds like a witch hunt to me.
Regardless of what happens I will still have the utmost respect for him as the most successful ever sporting cancer survivor and as a human being. He is well known as the most drug tested human being on the planet and has so much to lose to test positive, I just find it so hard to believe.

On another note isn't it funny that Cycling and/or Le Tour doesn't rate a mention on the sporting news ever but will show up on the normal news when there is a crash or some controversy :roll: Bloody media :evil:

jaster
2nd September 2005, 09:52 AM
NEWS BULLETIN!

Lance Armstrong's record-setting seventh Tour de France victory, along with his entire Tour legacy, may now be tarnished beyond repair. Armstrong is again being interrogated by French police after three banned substances were found in his South of France hotel room during a post-Tour vacation.

The three substances in question are toothpaste, deodorant and soap, all of which have been banned in France for more than 75 years.

French authorities also searched Armstrong and found something else they had never seen before, a backbone.

AndyP
2nd September 2005, 10:03 AM
Jaster, are you aware that the last member that bagged the French on this site got banned?   8-[

jaster
2nd September 2005, 10:34 AM
Edited to fall inline with Ozgolfs new PC policies 8)

AndyP
2nd September 2005, 10:40 AM
Edited to fall inline with Ozgolfs new PC policies  8)
It was a joke, although the statement was true.
Put it back, it was funny.

jaster
3rd September 2005, 10:00 PM
It's back :lol:

BrisWesty
18th September 2005, 10:05 PM
That sounds like the upgrade in the French terror alert from scared to run away, still less however than the major terror statuses of surrender and collaborate.

henno
17th February 2010, 11:06 PM
At least he has a sense of humour (http://twitter.com/lancearmstrong/status/9045920131).


Golfed w/ @college6 today. On one tee I couldn't find my ball. I said, "you take my ball college?" He replied, "no, cancer did."

Yossarian
17th February 2010, 11:10 PM
Ha!

MegaWatty
17th February 2010, 11:17 PM
Thanks for dragging up French sh!t...I was thinking 'surely not" after seeing the heading!!!

When did Solaman play with Lance?

AndyP
18th February 2010, 06:55 AM
Worst threadmine ever!

LarryLong
18th February 2010, 07:10 AM
I thought this was going to be the final proof that Armstrong was on the gear.

Of course, I don't need proof to know that he was. :)

virge666
18th February 2010, 07:39 AM
I do love bagging the french - but those who know History will know just how dominant the French have been.

Barring the last 70 years or so, the French have pretty much kicked the shit out of anyone who looked at them the wrong way. The 5 or 6 civil wars they had sort of kept them very well trained.

The other funny thing is that the Americans are the ones that keep dragging up the French's tendancy to roll over, and they are the ones who are always the last to go to the World Wars.

razaar
18th February 2010, 08:32 AM
The yanks have never trusted France and vice versa since the American War of Independence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_in_the_American_Revolutionary_War

Also, the war in Iraq with each country protecting its oil interests has re ignited bad feelings between both countries. Armstrong is an obvious target of the French. The yanks would probably do the same but there are no athletes of importance from France at this level.

henno
18th February 2010, 08:34 AM
The French have a patriotic arrogance only equalled by the patriotic arrogance of the US. It's no wonder they don't get along.

virge666
18th February 2010, 08:55 AM
The yanks have never trusted France and vice versa since the American War of Independence.

Also, the war in Iraq with each country protecting its oil interests has re ignited bad feelings between both countries.


The French have a patriotic arrogance only equalled by the patriotic arrogance of the US. It's no wonder they don't get along.


Exactly...

Fishman Dan
19th February 2010, 09:51 AM
Cheese eating surrender monkeys.

WBennett
19th February 2010, 10:27 AM
Cheese eating surrender monkeys.


Damn straight. Dan, for a Carlton supporter you are not a bad bloke!

Dotty
14th June 2012, 12:43 PM
Bump.

(Just so the 2012 TdF thread doesn't get polluted with the Armstrong baggage.)

dc68
14th June 2012, 01:05 PM
Seems a waste for your 4000th Dotty.

WBennett
14th June 2012, 08:26 PM
he is allowed one poor effort in 4000. dave1 is hoping for one good one in his first 4000

WBennett
14th June 2012, 08:27 PM
for what it is worth, Armstrong has never tested positive. innocent until proven guilty

jimandr
14th June 2012, 10:06 PM
I'm puzzled about this, on two separate fronts.

As stated, Lance has never tested positive, and according to himself, he's been tested 500 times.

Secondly, if his accusers know how he beat all these tests, surely they would have assisted the authorities to develop a test that will detect what he was taking.

To be honest, I want to believe his innocence, in the same way I want to believe the champions before him, such as Miguel Indurain, were also clean, and therefore genuine champions. However, I have a feeling I'll be disappointed if they pursue this all the way. I don't think they would dare to tear down the king of the sport without being very confident of their evidence.

dave1
15th June 2012, 12:44 AM
for what it is worth, Armstrong has never tested positive. innocent until proven guilty Ben cousins never tested positive either.Innocent till proven.

MegaWatty
15th June 2012, 12:56 AM
Ben cousins never tested positive either.Innocent till proven. Don't even try the Cousins line.

Sydney Hacker
15th June 2012, 03:40 AM
Don't even try the Cousins line. Hasn't Cousins already tried all the lines?

MegaWatty
15th June 2012, 08:20 AM
That's good! :)

WBennett
15th June 2012, 08:27 AM
I'd suggest Armstrong underwent more vigourous testing than the self confessed junkie from Perth.

Moe Norman
15th June 2012, 10:04 AM
Marion Jones never tested positive.

TourFit
15th June 2012, 10:10 AM
If they take Armstrongs' 7 Tour wins away, then from 1996 to now (16 Tours) there will have been TWO untainted winners. Cadel Evans from last year and Carlos Sastre in 2008.

Bjarne Riis won in 1996 and has admitted to doping.
Ullrich ('97) has admitted it (along with the ENTIRE Team Telekom) and has served a drug ban
Pantani in '98... was a drug cheat, and it killed him
Armstrong for the next 7 ('99-'05)
'06 was when Landis was pinged for drugging up
'07 won by a tainted Contador, currently serving a drug ban
'09...again Contador
'10...saw Contador stripped this time for actually being caught

Maybe the problem lies with the fact that the testing/decision making etc is performed by the individual country Cycling Federations...they sit on their hands and delay the decisions (while the rider keeps racing) and very often, it takes months, or in Contadors' case nearly 2 years to come up with anything. By then there are other problems that need solving, like he WON the 2011 Giro while waiting for the result etc.

Time for the governing body to jump all over this before the sport is completely destroyed and has NEGATIVE credibility left.

timah!
15th June 2012, 10:16 AM
I'd say that for the general public, if Armstrong was guilty (and I for one sincerely hope he's not) then international cycling will be dead.

Captain Nemo
15th June 2012, 10:19 AM
He'll get off, always has always will.
He has too much money and knows too many poeple in high places...
JMO

WBennett
15th June 2012, 10:26 AM
Anyone who was watching the 06 event saw Landis was on the gear - he had a stage where he over heated and kept pouring water on himself. The next day he tested positive...

Ashes
15th June 2012, 10:28 AM
I agree, can't see him getting done after all this time. USADA are just pissed he refused to talk to them.

LarryLong
15th June 2012, 10:39 AM
Time for the governing body to jump all over this before the sport is completely destroyed and has NEGATIVE credibility left.

I think that time was about 10 years ago. Seriously, I don't think anybody who isn't totally in love with the sport thinks that a high percentage of the top riders (if not all of them) are on the gear.

Captain Nemo
15th June 2012, 10:55 AM
Anyone who was watching the 06 event saw Landis was on the gear - he had a stage where he over heated and kept pouring water on himself. The next day he tested positive...

That was classic.
Shocking day the day before, then the next day, mountain stage, takes off 100km or whatever it was and goes solo, wins by minutes....PLEASE!
Im a road bike rider, and i dont beleive for 1 minute most of the guys are clean.....

Haystacks
15th June 2012, 11:07 AM
Lance had to be on drugs to break up with her!:???:
http://www.google.com.au/url?source=imgres&ct=img&q=http://img2.timeinc.net/people/i/2008/database/sherylcrow/sherylcrow300.jpg&sa=X&ei=C5jaT6H1GoWyiQfCqIjRAg&ved=0CAQQ8wc4EA&usg=AFQjCNHMxyvu1hoJPAkZ1LG4d-Wdvnhd8g

Captain Nemo
15th June 2012, 11:08 AM
Thinking the same thing.
Saw her live before John Cougar, she's good for a Cougar......=P~

sms316
15th June 2012, 02:05 PM
Funny how nobody suspects Cadel Evans to be on the juice.

Ashes
15th June 2012, 02:20 PM
Funny how nobody suspects Cadel Evans to be on the juice.

There's really been no reason to. He's never had any unusual spikes in performance, and there's been no rumors coming out of the inner circles like there has been with others.

The only really amazing thing I've seen him do was that climb last year where he almost blew up, didn't get any assistance from others, and just dragged himself and a few others up the hill solo to stamp his claim on it. There were never any amazing turns of speed though, he just ground away at, which is pretty much him in a nutshell.

dave1
15th June 2012, 05:36 PM
Ruin the sport?

1 will I stop riding my bike if Lance is found guilty? NO
2 Will kids stop riding to school? no
3 will the tour de france not go on? NO its bigger than ever
4 will professional cycling stop? I doubt it - lets call it a no
5 will sponsors and Tv ratings drop? I doubt it!!

They will need bloody good lawyers because Lance will have some heavy hitters (only the best) batting on his side I know that

Is Lance guilty ? I'm not sure and when I say that I mean it - I'm sitting right on the middle of the fence

wait until the judge hands his verdict down. it was reported that up to 10 cyclists say lance did EPO.

this evidence alone isn't enough to convict him

it was said he tested positive as in higher EPO at the tour down under...UM hmm with all due respect why would he cheat in that event? in terms of world status.. in cycling the tour down under is the chook raffle.

Ashes
15th June 2012, 05:41 PM
I actually think he probably was on some sort of program. Doesn't really worry me too much cos the other contenders were too so it was likely an even contest. His achievements are still phenomanal.

The first Tour was marred by cheating with participants jumping on trains and stuff. I just view the race as cannonball run, cheating is accepted provided you don't get caught.

dave1
15th June 2012, 06:52 PM
maybe they shoudl just let everyone cheat...its been said before :-) to be honest It doesn't detract too much from it

I dont know riding a bike for 21 days through mountains its no wonder they are on the juice

its rumoured that as early as the 1930's riders were juicing up, its not like geez didnt know that

Ashes
15th June 2012, 07:05 PM
Obviously it would be great if all were clean, and I don't condone cheating but..

.. if they don't pick them up quickly, they should just let sleeping dogs lie. Changing results years after the event is stupid. I don't think anyone, including Schleck, is happy the way the whole Contador thing played out.

dave1
15th June 2012, 09:12 PM
Obviously it would be great if all were clean, and I don't condone cheating but..

.. if they don't pick them up quickly, they should just let sleeping dogs lie. Changing results years after the event is stupid. I don't think anyone, including Schleck, is happy the way the whole Contador thing played out.

cadel said he felt for contador

There doesnt seem to be too much anger from other cyclists when someone gets caught....its like they have sympathy for a fallen comrad even though they cheated.... :?

its certainly different from golf eh?? :-)

Ashes
15th June 2012, 09:41 PM
I think the whole performance enhancing substance thing has gotten out of hand to be honest. They're all on various supplements that are performance enhancing to some degree, some are legal and some are not. And much of the banned stuff is fairly pedestrian stuff that doesn't enhance performance but could potentially mask other banned substances. Must be a pain in the **** as a professional sportsman having to worry bout what you can and can't take.

dave1
15th June 2012, 09:51 PM
I think the whole performance enhancing substance thing has gotten out of hand to be honest. They're all on various supplements that are performance enhancing to some degree, some are legal and some are not. And much of the banned stuff is fairly pedestrian stuff that doesn't enhance performance but could potentially mask other banned substances. Must be a pain in the **** as a professional sportsman having to worry bout what you can and can't take.

many common people (US) woul fail an anti doping test

take cough medicine - failed test

asthma puffer...YOu fail steroid test

many painn killers

many anti inflamatory drugs - failed tests

YEAH but think of the hot chicks YOU'LL meet

rubin
15th June 2012, 10:29 PM
many common people (US) woul fail an anti doping test

take cough medicine - failed test

asthma puffer...YOu fail steroid test

many painn killers

many anti inflamatory drugs - failed tests

YEAH but think of the hot chicks YOU'LL meet

Wrong Dave.

I went through a series of tests when I was running. A number of state events and a few national ones. I was, and always have been an asthmatic and used ventolin, becotide etc, and never failed one, never even came close to failing one. Cough medicine is a myth, (never failed one when I was taking that) as is the anti inflam drugs. Some painkillers are, but they are hardcore painkillers and 9 times out of 10, u need a prescription for them.

Lobsta
15th June 2012, 11:02 PM
asthma puffer...YOu fail steroid test


Different type of steroid mate.

Asthma preventers : CORTICOsteroid

Banned in sport: ANABOLIC steroid

The word steroid refers to a common chemical structure in the molecule. But the two types of steroids have completely different actions. Similar, in a way, to the fact that both water (H2O) and cyanide (HCN), contain a hydrogen atom, but have vastly different effects when taken.

dave1
16th June 2012, 01:21 AM
Cheers for info.

Im asthmatic in winter months also.

Lets hope lance is clean.

virge666
16th June 2012, 07:07 AM
If he is found guilty. It will have a devastating effect on his charity foundation.

It is very important for him to be clean.

meh
16th June 2012, 07:19 AM
Funny how nobody suspects Cadel Evans to be on the juice.

Not surprising that you would suggest he is.

sms316
16th June 2012, 07:53 AM
Not surprising that you would suggest he is. I didn't. It just always amuses me how Australians are never suspected to have been on the drugs. Are we really that naive?

meh
16th June 2012, 08:04 AM
I didn't. It just always amuses me how Australians are never suspected to have been on the drugs. Are we really that naive?

Oh, you're suggesting he might be, just not man enought to say it.

sms316
16th June 2012, 08:30 AM
Oh, you're suggesting he might be, just not man enought to say it. Am I? I don't really have an opinion on it, but it any cyclist getting done for drugs hardly comes as a surprise.

PeteyD
16th June 2012, 10:58 AM
Why do we really care?

dave1
16th June 2012, 11:06 AM
This is a guess but based on some history but I think weigtlifting has more drug cheats per particpant than cycling - but because cycling has such a high profile its highlighted

each year about the tour de france has 150-170 riders...about 2 or 3 are cuaght each year, when you add up thw whoel proffessional cycling season of 15-20 events its pretty low% of people caught for how many events/particpants are involved.

its just high profile when it does. Weighlifters - meh youd barely hear about it.

yes there was a real glut of cyclists caught a few years ago, because testing is better.

yes the problem is big, not saying otherwise but to say its wrecking the sport and we should all just pack up and go home is an over reaction (In my view anyways)

is ever going to be fully clean - NO way but to be honest that desnt concern me.

LarryLong
16th June 2012, 07:45 PM
This page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling) makes for some interesting reading, and it goes a long way towards explaining why they don't just let them ride. Death, addiction, long-term health problems, the works.

dave1
17th June 2012, 10:31 AM
Yeah a few have died just suddenly.

Flo jo (us runner) dropped dead.

You cant put so many toxic chemicals in your body and not expect there to be a payback at some point.

All I know is Lance will claim this

1 the 10 cyclists claiming to know or see or be supplied by lance - why did they wait till now to make such claims - maybe they got caught and dobbed the "ring leader"

2 lance will say " I haven't tested positive ever" - hes the most tested athlete bar Usain Bolt.

3 Italian media have a beef with him.

Im on the fence. He might be guilty. But they are going to have a fight proving it. The evidence will need to be more than "what other cyclists said"

They are going to need ..Physical evidence, video tape or a phone tap. The epo evidence will be scrutinised. They won't get a confession (no chance)

Its a pity it will over shadow the tour this year.

Interesting times ahead to see how it pans out.

Daves
17th June 2012, 11:10 AM
Flo Jo died from an Epileptic Seizure, there was no drugs involved according to the Coroner.

popper81
17th June 2012, 11:27 AM
Flo Jo died from an Epileptic Seizure, there was no drugs involved according to the Coroner. Dave, don't ruin a point with the truth.

Webster
17th June 2012, 11:42 AM
I thought she died from testicular cancer.

dave1
17th June 2012, 02:00 PM
She had enough elephent juice in her to kill the russian army. ..Seizure ...Sure...What caused her brain to have the seizure.?

I know about epilepsy ...My son had seizures

Thankfully none for 5 years now!

In the 80% of kids that grow out of them after 3 yrs of age.

FLO JO was on the Jungle juice!

rubin
17th June 2012, 02:05 PM
Do u really believe some of the shit that you post - or is it a form of trolling, dave1 style.......

dave1
17th June 2012, 03:50 PM
Oh please.

Did you see her run?

I did!! Flo jo was a steroid injected rocket!

rubin
17th June 2012, 03:58 PM
Ahhh I see what ur doing now......

Your thoughts on Michael Johnson then? And while your at it, let's go with Usain Bolt, Ian Thorpe, Michael phelps, and Jesse Owens.

dave1
17th June 2012, 04:32 PM
Ahhh I see what ur doing now......Your thoughts on Michael Johnson then? And while your at it, let's go with Usain Bolt, Ian Thorpe, Michael phelps, and Jesse Owens. Mate she was a drug cheatHave a look on you tube ...She was on the juice and in my opinion contributed to her death at a very young age! Just an opinion though...

Webster
17th June 2012, 06:07 PM
I think any of us would have obeyed her commands once she issued them in that deep throaty voice.

It would be like James Earl Jones sneaking up on you in a dark alley.

matty
17th June 2012, 07:08 PM
Rubin, she was a prototype shemale. She could have bent you over and tickled your prostate with about half of her clitoris. Without raising a sweat.

That for me is POTY. :lol::mrgreen:

I think you were too young to see her run rubes but you knew it wasn't right. You didn't need to be a scientist in a lab with a urine/blood sample, just a human being. Scary.

If a woman was physically stronger than me, or I couldn't put my arms around her and my right hand touch my left when doing so, I'd keep well away for the reasons Jack stated. :wink:

mudrat
17th June 2012, 07:12 PM
The nails she used to wear we're the most feminine thing about her....

rubin
17th June 2012, 07:25 PM
That for me is POTY. :lol::mrgreen:

I think you were too young to see her run rubes but you knew it wasn't right. You didn't need to be a scientist in a lab with a urine/blood sample, just a human being. Scary.

If a woman was physically stronger than me, or I couldn't put my arms around her and my right hand touch my left when doing so, I'd keep well away for the reasons Jack stated. :wink:

I know full well she was on "enahancing products", my comment was more to dave having a crack at almost anyone at the peak of sport.

I saw her run a lot, replay videos etc. her running action, in particular her lower leg action, is what most sprinters aim to achieve. I remember making a comment one day in the same line as what Jack said, cause she actually looked like she had balls.

dave1
17th June 2012, 07:30 PM
Its rumoured EPO contributed to the Death of famous Italian cyclist Marco Pantani

http://m.guardian.co.uk/sport/2004/mar/07/cycling.features?cat=sport&type=article

Its a sad tale.

dave1
17th June 2012, 07:35 PM
I know full well she was on "enahancing products", my comment was more to dave having a crack at almost anyone at the peak of sport.I saw her run a lot, replay videos etc. her running action, in particular her lower leg action, is what most sprinters aim to achieve. I remember making a comment one day in the same line as what Jack said, cause she actually looked like she had balls. Rubes.....Which post did I have a crack at amyone other than flo jo?.....I stated Flo jo.....I have said Im "sitting on the fence" with lance armstrong. You mentioned the others!

matty
17th June 2012, 07:36 PM
I know full well she was on "enahancing products", my comment was more to dave having a crack at almost anyone at the peak of sport.

I saw her run a lot, replay videos etc. her running action, in particular her lower leg action, is what most sprinters aim to achieve. I remember making a comment one day in the same line as what Jack said, cause she actually looked like she had balls.

Fair enough. Remember how dominant Marion Jones was. Not even she could get near what flo Jo did.

rubin
17th June 2012, 07:48 PM
true. thing is though, FloJo didnt actually need the drugs to win - she would have done with natural talent. Marion Jones needed a bit of help to get to the level she was at.

Webster
17th June 2012, 07:53 PM
Not true Rubin. Flo Jo's career prior to the roid spike just before the 88 Olympics was unexceptional. And then she retired.

meh
17th June 2012, 08:18 PM
Not true Rubin. Flo Jo's career prior to the roid spike just before the 88 Olympics was unexceptional. And then she retired.

Yeah, the silver medal in the 84 olympics was shit.

dave1
17th June 2012, 08:20 PM
true. thing is though, FloJo didnt actually need the drugs to win - she would have done with natural talent. Marion Jones needed a bit of help to get to the level she was at.

She had talent ..Yep...
.

Doubt she had marion jones talent

Good read on drugs in sport is Werner Reiterer. (bad spell on sir name) he was an aussie weight lifter...

Google him. Good story on the mental dilema of wether an athlete can accept "Im good but wont win at olympic level - should I take something" ...

Or "nup im not going to do drugs" And im content.

Werner speaks about how he was torn - he knew the eastern Europeans were cheating (but winning) ...Now times have changed as testing is more stringent.

But in those times (80's and 90's) it was a dilemma ...My livelyhood might rely on winning .


Werners book is a good read.

Webster
17th June 2012, 08:23 PM
Yeah, the silver medal in the 84 olympics was shit.

Pfffttt.............silver........

mudrat
17th June 2012, 08:28 PM
She was probably helped by the countries that boycotted in 1984.

dave1
17th June 2012, 08:32 PM
She had an arse like Black Caviar!

:-)

matty
17th June 2012, 08:43 PM
Concerning that you look at Black Caviar like that.

meh
17th June 2012, 08:48 PM
Concerning that you look at Black Caviar like that.

Nothing surprises me when it's posted by dave1....

dave1
17th June 2012, 08:50 PM
Heh heh :-)

Arse like venus and serena williams

LarryLong
19th June 2012, 12:10 PM
Here's a good article on why people can't bear to accept that Armstrong probably was a cheat: http://www.forbes.com/sites/richkarlgaard/2012/06/13/lance-armstrong-hero-cheat-and-tragic-figure/

And here's a really good interview with a scientist who makes a pretty good case: http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden

Just to round things out, here's one from a journo who was a pro cyclist who blew the whistle a few years ago: http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/paul-kimmage

Mububban
19th June 2012, 02:33 PM
As stated, Lance has never tested positive, and according to himself, he's been tested 500 times.


Secondly, if his accusers know how he beat all these tests, surely they would have assisted the authorities to develop a test that will detect what he was taking.


And if he and his team had developed some way of beating all the tests, surely every other team would be trying to do exactly the same as he was?!? They wouldn't want to expose him, they'd want to replicate his techniques.



To be honest, I want to believe his innocence, in the same way I want to believe the champions before him, such as Miguel Indurain, were also clean, and therefore genuine champions. However, I have a feeling I'll be disappointed if they pursue this all the way. I don't think they would dare to tear down the king of the sport without being very confident of their evidence.


This is pretty much exactly what I was going to type myself. I want to believe he's innocent, I really do. I don't want one of my lifetime's greatest sporting achievements undone without the taint of drugs. But the allegations keep coming, and now it's not just against him, but also against his staff.


Of course, without a smoking gun, even if found guilty by other sorts of evidence, he can claim till his dying day that he's innocent and it was all a witch hunt.


Sad sad sad….

dave1
19th June 2012, 03:27 PM
Here's a good article on why people can't bear to accept that Armstrong probably was a cheat: http://www.forbes.com/sites/richkarlgaard/2012/06/13/lance-armstrong-hero-cheat-and-tragic-figure/And here's a really good interview with a scientist who makes a pretty good case: http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashendenJust to round things out, here's one from a journo who was a pro cyclist who blew the whistle a few years ago: http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/paul-kimmage Thanks for links..Will read tonight

Dotty
19th June 2012, 04:54 PM
And if he and his team had developed some way of beating all the tests, surely every other team would be trying to do exactly the same as he was?!? They wouldn't want to expose him, they'd want to replicate his techniques.

But they did do similar, allegedly. Telekom's two victories have an asterisk beside them, for systematic doping.

It was the French media making the allegations against Lance and USPS, not the opposition. (The big drug scandal was Festina, but that was detected by customs inspecting a team car driving to London for the start of the TdF, not by drug testing nor dobbing.)

dave1
19th June 2012, 07:19 PM
Marion jones was similar - post office interception

Hux
19th June 2012, 07:39 PM
I think letting sleeping dogs lay is probably the best outcome.
Sure I have my doubts about Lance - "I just totally reshaped by body and ability whilst I was off with cancer treatment"!!!
However its old news, the records are written and (hopefully) a more stringent system is in place.

Is Cadel on the gear - shit I hope not. When I see him ride I see grit and determination rather than peak performance. He seems to just have a heart like Phar Lap that keeps him from quitting which is really what a real GC grand tour rider is all about.....ability and 100%+ ticker.

Interesting thing about PE drugs - how much better is the drug cheat because of the PE? Natural ability and hard work form so much. The old mirror is a tough critic. What a shame it would be to look in the mirror and never really know if you were that good or even better than the other guy/gal.

AndyP
19th June 2012, 08:33 PM
5% difference according to one of the articles linked.

LarryLong
19th June 2012, 09:15 PM
I think letting sleeping dogs lay is probably the best outcome.

I don't think so anymore. The trouble is that many of the people running the sport and enjoying wealth and high standing within cycling circles are the same people who cheated, encouraged others to cheat or knew people were cheating and hushed it up.

The only way to move on would be for everybody to come clean, admit that the sport was a farce for over twenty years, and try to find the resolve to clean things up for the future.

The quote that sums it up for me is from the cyclist - "As a kid, I chose cycling. And I don't want my kid, if he were ever to do it, to be betrayed in the way that I was betrayed."

dave1
19th June 2012, 09:39 PM
5% difference according to one of the articles linked.

5% over 19-20 days in a grand tour like the tour de france is huge.

Ashes
19th June 2012, 09:49 PM
5% over 19-20 days in a grand tour like the tour de france is huge.

5% up one mountain stage is huge.

rubin
19th June 2012, 09:56 PM
The 5% is not so much the on the day performance, its the extra ability it gives u in training as well.

Ie assume u train for a year getting an additional 5% each day. Now think of the benefits.

dave1
19th June 2012, 10:25 PM
5% up one mountain stage is huge. Race over..You gain 3 minutes on the pelaton - Race over!

dave1
19th June 2012, 10:27 PM
The 5% is not so much the on the day performance, its the extra ability it gives u in training as well. Ie assume u train for a year getting an additional 5% each day. Now think of the benefits.Bingo. People forget that aspect.

Moe Norman
20th June 2012, 08:18 AM
And here's a really good interview with a scientist who makes a pretty good case: http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden



that one is a bit of a questionable article imo. I don't have an opinion either way, but an 'investigative' journalist matching anonymous batch numbers with names is a bit rich. They brush over the fact that Armstrong gave them open access to his files, but according to countless other sources out there - batches of samples used for scientific purposes are given ID#'s that are never ever recorded against an athletes name.

So a sample, that a journalist claims is Armstrongs based on untraceable batch numbers, tested positive to EPO in 1999, 7 years later. How did the same guy then beat the 'newly designed tests' created in 2000 to go on and win the 00,01,02,03,04 and 05 TDF's?

LarryLong
20th June 2012, 11:07 AM
that one is a bit of a questionable article imo. I don't have an opinion either way, but an 'investigative' journalist matching anonymous batch numbers with names is a bit rich. They brush over the fact that Armstrong gave them open access to his files, but according to countless other sources out there - batches of samples used for scientific purposes are given ID#'s that are never ever recorded against an athletes name.

To quote the scientist:


"Well, again, there's been a lot of disinformation about this. The laboratory absolutely had no way of knowing athlete identity from the sample they're given. They have a number on them, but that's never linked to an athlete's name. The only group that had both the number and the athlete's name is the federation, in this case it was the UCI.

The UCI had those documents, and an investigative journalist, Damien Ressiot from l'Equipe, went to the UCI and said, "Can I have copies of Lance Armstrong's doping control forms from the '99 Tour?" Now, the UCI had to go to Lance Armstrong and ask his permission, which he gave them. Now, Lance Armstrong gave permission to the UCI to give these doping control forms to Damien Ressiot. Damien Ressiot took those forms, which have the athlete's name, obviously, and the sample number, so he matched the sample number with the results from the laboratory that had the sample number and the percentage of isoforms. And in that way he linked the percentage of isoforms with the number, the athlete's name, and in that way identified them as Lance Armstrong."


In other words, the lab had no idea whose results they were when they detected the positive, the ID number from Armstrong's UCI forms is irrefutably his, and they were obtained in isolation and matched. That seems pretty much water tight to me. The UCI would refute it if it wasn't.


So a sample, that a journalist claims is Armstrongs based on untraceable batch numbers, tested positive to EPO in 1999, 7 years later. How did the same guy then beat the 'newly designed tests' created in 2000 to go on and win the 00,01,02,03,04 and 05 TDF's?

I think it's pretty clear that quite a few riders were getting away with all sorts of things in that timeframe. FTA:

"And then in 2000 when there was a test for EPO, we suspected that probably shied some of the athletes back towards transfusions, which at that time were undetectable. So it was kind of this middle period straight up after 2000, where we suspected the athletes resorted back to transfusions. They were still using EPO but transfusions reappeared.




And it was on that basis that we did the research and introduced the test for homologous transfusion, because that in particular is a horrendous, especially dangerous method of blood doping. The risks are very real and very severe. So there was a very strong medical and moral reason to bring in a test, to stop athletes from going down that path.




And that's pretty much where we are five years later. We have the test for EPO, we have the test for homologous transfusion, but there's no test for autologous transfusion, and we know that athletes, by carefully monitoring their EPO injections, can continue to get away with that as well. So that's the scenario we're faced with at the moment."


The fact is, despite widespread doping in many sports, the improved tests didn't manage to catch that many athletes. To quote the article:


"If you look back, really the only significant high profile case that was purely from a doping control standpoint, is probably Ben Johnson in Seoul, and Floyd Landis at the Tour de France. Other than that, I think you struggle to really come up with a big fish caught with a doping control."


I think he covers off most of the counter-arguments pretty well.

Moe Norman
20th June 2012, 11:41 AM
In other words, the lab had no idea whose results they were when they detected the positive, the ID number from Armstrong's UCI forms is irrefutably his, and they were obtained in isolation and matched. That seems pretty much water tight to me. The UCI would refute it if it wasn't.

It's been refuted. The party line is that once the scientific samples are given batch numbers (for the purposes listed above) there is no way they can ever be linked to an athlete as they are not recorded. There is no way of matching a batch number to an athlete as an athlete is never assigned an ID, otherwise the whole process is pointless, despite what a journo from L'Equipe would have people believe.

I'm not sure if he was a drug user or not, but these articles driven by people with an agenda dressed up as some sort of irrefutable evidence are just bogus. Armstrong gave them access to his files, knowing that batch numbers can't be matched.

LarryLong
20th June 2012, 05:22 PM
It's been refuted. The party line is that once the scientific samples are given batch numbers (for the purposes listed above) there is no way they can ever be linked to an athlete as they are not recorded. There is no way of matching a batch number to an athlete as an athlete is never assigned an ID, otherwise the whole process is pointless, despite what a journo from L'Equipe would have people believe.

Got a link for that? I did some googling and found people questioning the validity of the samples and accusations of tampering, but nothing that suggests a definitive statement that the number on the UCI record that the journo got couldn't be matched to the sample numbers from the lab, or that the numbers didn't match.

If there was no way they could ever be linked to a name, what would be the point of keeping the samples at all? I understand that the system is designed so that the lab should never be able to find out, and I'd be surprised if the UCI were so lax with their records that they would give anything out that would compromise that. I do find it strange that it was as simple as matching two numbers, and that the records would be given to a journo of all people if there was any chance at all they could be linked to real world samples (wouldn't the numbers be redacted?), but the scientist who I assume would be familiar with the procedure is prepared to back the evidence. He comes across as a bloke with a fair bit of integrity.

It's quite possible that I'm being sucked in by the bias here. I'll admit to some readiness to believe that Armstrong is guilty. If nothing else, I'm just trying to gain an informed opinion (that Lance is a cheat! :) )

Moe Norman
21st June 2012, 07:49 AM
the point of keeping the samples is for scientific purposes, not for identifying athletes who cheat.

They have other samples stored away with Athletes names on them that are stored for the very specific reason of identifying cheating. In fact there would be samples from the 99 TDF for this very purpose somewhere floating about, but we don't hear much about those ones!

dave1
22nd June 2012, 11:38 PM
Lance has never failed a test..

He volunteers his files/samples...

Hes the most tested athlete ever.

This tells me that Im jury still out on this one..

They are going to need more than some stories from french journos

Lance's Lawyers would (and will) rip that to shreds in a court of law

Jm still very much sittin on the fence

Johnny Canuck
23rd June 2012, 12:28 AM
Can you sit quietly on the fence?

goughy
23rd June 2012, 07:34 AM
I haven't rad all posted here, but the issues for him are more than about positive tests. He is named along with 4 or 5 others who are doctors and managers of teams. It's about a culture of doping within the teams he was involved in and the head people of that team fostering that culture. So while they may have some evidence of him personally doping (I think more likely questionable results rather than outright positives) it's about much much more than that. Some of the people named have been involved in the doping culture, I think one of the doctors has had a multitude of the cyclists he worked with tested positive. But simply we are only guessing what they have, as not even LA knows what evidence they have, and it appears that he won't until something like 5 days before his hearing. That's the way the system works. But this is much more than about a simple positive test. And I believe many cyclists have received bans having never had a positive test - but found guilty based on 'circumstantial' evidence. Many of those admitted it after being banned.

I don't know if he's in trouble or not. Once the hearings happen they may ban him, then he may take it to the CAS and get it overturned. Or it could be like Contador. Positive test, suspended (same as LA is now), Spanish federation found him not guilty as removed suspension, WADA took it to CAS and they overturned the Spanish finding and banned him for 2 years. Suffice to say it's a long way till over.

It affects me because he has been doing great in triathlon ans was looking forward to him racing at Kona this year. He has brought a spotlight to my sport like it has never seen before. He was to be racing IM France this weekend to validate his spot at Kona. But the suspension has stopped that. Only because the company that runs IM races (WTC) follows the guidelines of the USADA and as such any suspension handed out by them is followed. They did discuss changing that policy in the last week to allow LA to still race, but decided against that; obviously LA is not bigger than the sport. LA can still race many many other triathlons if he wants, as the Challenge Family, Rev3, and USAT are not signatories to the USADA so he can still enter those races. But the word is he was being paid millions to race a number of WTC races this year. Also plenty of chatter that he was being paid 1mill to race IM Cairns next year (by the Qld govt). But racing the other brands does nothing for him at Kona. And since it's not expected his hearing will be until November Kona is off the agenda.

He's not being treated any differently than any other athlete that has had this happen. I am sure USADA are following the letter of their law, I'm sure they don't want him to get away on technicalities. I think he could be in trouble this time because, as I said, it appears it's not just about a positive test. There's much more to it. Especially since he's the only athlete named, the others are doctors and management. There's also chatter that the current Radio Shack team could be kicked from the Tour de France since some of those named are currently involved with that team. So this action reaches much further than just LA.

If he's banned, I do not expect him to do what many seem to, and admit to it after the fact. And with regards to positive test, don't forget that Marion Jones never tested positive either.

sms316
23rd June 2012, 07:41 AM
Has AndyP been tested?

goughy
23rd June 2012, 07:43 AM
Just thought it's worth stating my position on how I feel about all this. Which is I don't know. Cycling is funny in that so many do it, and have been busted for it. Like I think it's something like 70% of the tdf winners over the last 20 years have been busted at some stage for doping. I think LA is an outstanding athlete, and he probably did beat others in a level playing field as most he beat were also doped to the eyeballs. But to me it is still no excuse. I know those guys are like type A win at all cost personalities, but I'm not. Me, I would rather lose clean than win doped. So yes, I think he's amazing at what he did, and doing amazing things for triathlon at the moment, or at least was. But I think he doped, and that he should get a ban. Should they remove his titles, I just don't know. In some cases if they did, the winner would go back to third or fourth as second and thirds had been banned for doping. So it does make it all a farce.

So my stance is I just don't bloody know. I'll just wait and see what comes of it all.

AndyP
23rd June 2012, 11:19 AM
Has AndyP been tested? No. But runners aren't on the juice like most cyclists are.

dave1
24th June 2012, 10:23 AM
Can you sit quietly on the fence?

OH JC thats a bit harsh. NO :-) but I'll try

LarryLong
25th August 2012, 07:45 AM
I wonder if Lance lied about having cancer too?

oncewasagolfer
25th August 2012, 07:57 AM
Stripped of 7 TDF victories WOW!

Ashes
25th August 2012, 08:11 AM
I've always been of the view Armstrong most likely cheated, but so did his opponents as well. USADA's crusade against Armstrong hasn't achieved anything but further undermine the sport.

From what I've read about USADA's conduct, their noses are hardly clean either and some of the assumptions they make are a joke.

There is still doubt as to whether USADA has authority to even strip him of his TdF titles. I actually don't think this is the end of it.

goughy
25th August 2012, 08:43 AM
You have to remember this thing against him now is for more than using drugs himself. It is about his involvement in the organisation and management of the culture within his teams. He is the only athlete named in this charge, the others are team boss's, doctors etc. Some have accepted it, others are taking it to arbitration. So you have to see the bigger picture here, it's not about nabbing him for using, but it's about removing the culture of it from cycling. Yes others have been caught, but there's have always been about then just using. This goes much further. I do hope they don't award the race wins to others though, but just leave them with an asterix.

AndyP
25th August 2012, 09:56 AM
But then Evans wouldn't get another title, even though he finished 8th.

18672

http://www.cyclingtips.com.au/2012/06/what-a-mess/

mike
25th August 2012, 10:39 AM
I hope the cheating prick gets put in jail.

TourFit
25th August 2012, 11:54 AM
Which one...?

By the looks of it, at the time there were a great deal of them that were cheating pricks!

In my view, if you make guys ride a bike at up to 200+km per day (or time trial, or climb up huge mountains) for 3 weeks and 3500km+, then I would say that there will be a great deal of them that would need help with it.

dc68
25th August 2012, 11:57 AM
FFS Why not just acknowledge that all the riders at that level are getting chemical assistance and let them go? They only harm themselves.

Ashes
25th August 2012, 01:46 PM
You have to remember this thing against him now is for more than using drugs himself. It is about his involvement in the organisation and management of the culture within his teams. He is the only athlete named in this charge, the others are team boss's, doctors etc. Some have accepted it, others are taking it to arbitration. So you have to see the bigger picture here, it's not about nabbing him for using, but it's about removing the culture of it from cycling. Yes others have been caught, but there's have always been about then just using. This goes much further. I do hope they don't award the race wins to others though, but just leave them with an asterix.

Accusing him of coordinating a doping ring sounds like criminal activity that should be handled by the appropriate authorities rather than USADA. Oh wait, the Feds did investigate and didn't find a case against him that would stand up in court...

goughy
25th August 2012, 02:15 PM
Might now ;)

Ashes
25th August 2012, 03:02 PM
Possibly, I wouldn't hold my breath though.

I'd just rather the USADA and others focused on the here and now rather than what's happened in the past. I don't see any value in chasing Armstrong; and similarly wouldn't see any value in revealing the likes if Indurain, LeMond, Mercx etc as cheats. Doesn't serve any purpose in deterring current athletes.

Dotty
25th August 2012, 04:12 PM
Possibly, I wouldn't hold my breath though.

I'd just rather the USADA and others focused on the here and now rather than what's happened in the past. I don't see any value in chasing Armstrong; and similarly wouldn't see any value in revealing the likes if Indurain, LeMond, Mercx etc as cheats. Doesn't serve any purpose in deterring current athletes.
Merckx had a few positive drug tests, including being thrown out of the Giro d'Italia.

Indurain retired, when the heat was being put on EPO use and has stayed out of the limelight. He kept his reputation intact.

Armstrong retired, but couldn't stay out of the limelight. It didn't do his reputation any good, by returning to the sport with Astana, who weren't allowed to start the TdF in the previous year, due to widespread failed drug tests. (He may as well paint a target on his forehead.)

Ashes
25th August 2012, 05:39 PM
I'm not sure why Armstrongs profile means he should be pursued while others aren't. The fact is he is dedicated to his Foundation which benefits from his profile.

Agree the Astana connection didn't help him, although his association with Michele Ferrari probably raises more suspicion than anything.

LarryLong
25th August 2012, 08:22 PM
I'm not sure why Armstrongs profile means he should be pursued while others aren't. The fact is he is dedicated to his Foundation which benefits from his profile.

Mind you, he benefits personally quite a bit from his foundation AND his profile.

I don't like the idea that his charitable work absolves him from being chased about his doping as a cyclist. They should be considered separately.

Ashes
19th September 2012, 12:47 PM
Just finished reading Tyler Hamilton's book 'The Secret Race'. Amazing account of what actually happened behind the scenes (assuming it is true). Well worth a read for those that follow cycling and other elite endurance sports. In all honesty, I'm not sure yet how it'll affect my level of interest in the TdF.

Mububban
19th September 2012, 02:29 PM
Aussie interview with Tyler Hamilton on ABC. he reckons modern cycling is cleaner than his era, but still not clean


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BAoRCQTUYU

Ashes
19th September 2012, 02:53 PM
There's evidence to suggest that. There was a rapid, unnatural increase in average speeds that has now fallen back a bit. He mentions in the book that in 2011, the fastest rider up certain HC climbs wouldn't have made the top 40 ten years earlier.

Tyler suggests its impossible for a clean rider to compete against those on epo, transfusions etc on the grand tours (shorter races are a different story). It's interesting, he said a lot of times when his performances were off and it was assumed he was sick, it was actually from not taking stuff for those stages.

Bushka
19th September 2012, 02:55 PM
If you were on lances team you were on the gear there was no middle ground. I've heard this from a few very solid sources who rode with and supported him.

Obviously drugs in cycling is rampant but the dickhead let everyone fall round him while still pretending to be whiter than snow. Not only that he gave guys who got nabbed a drubbing in the press when they were his domestiques lugging his arse around during their careers.

He deserves to be tarred and feathered. The amount of cash he made throwing every other ****er under the bus and carrying on like he was gods gift to cycling is disgusting.

Ashes
19th September 2012, 03:13 PM
If Tyler's account is true, then it was pretty much every major team doing it. Tyler's Dr after he left Postal was investigated and it turned out he was supplying half the peloton with EPO and transfusions amongst other things.

It also seemed pretty normal within cycling ranks to keep quiet and let others fall around you.

But there are plenty of stories out there of Lance turning on close friends. I've certainly changed my view after reading the book.

dave1
19th September 2012, 07:49 PM
What if a team member gets caught the whole team is suspended?

Harsh?? Hmmm certainly the current penalties are not acting as a deterent.

We are told its a team sport.

LarryLong
19th September 2012, 08:35 PM
If you were on lances team you were on the gear there was no middle ground. I've heard this from a few very solid sources who rode with and supported him.

Obviously drugs in cycling is rampant but the dickhead let everyone fall round him while still pretending to be whiter than snow. Not only that he gave guys who got nabbed a drubbing in the press when they were his domestiques lugging his arse around during their careers.

He deserves to be tarred and feathered. The amount of cash he made throwing every other ****er under the bus and carrying on like he was gods gift to cycling is disgusting.

Pretty good summation.

Ashes
19th September 2012, 08:57 PM
What if a team member gets caught the whole team is suspended?

Harsh?? Hmmm certainly the current penalties are not acting as a deterent.

We are told its a team sport.

The penalties aren't the issue - its that there is a very slim chance of getting caught. That's changing now which is why doping has reduced (as evidenced by the drop in speeds). You'll never stop people from trying though, there's too much to gain.

Moe Norman
20th September 2012, 09:10 AM
I just don't understand why all his teammates were caught and he wasn't, when he got tested more than anyone?

Did they save the special undetectable drugs for Lance and give the other blokes the nasty stuff?

just
20th September 2012, 09:32 AM
I just don't understand why all his teammates were caught and he wasn't, when he got tested more than anyone?

Did they save the special undetectable drugs for Lance and give the other blokes the nasty stuff?
Except all his team mates weren't caught and some have subsequently admitted taking drugs to the drug testing agency in the US supposedly. The story now can be twisted any way to fit whatever you like. Some think the bloke was a cheat, some don't. I'm pretty sure Lance would be happy with the ambiguity that surrounds the issue. You think it's incredible story to believe he used drugs when he was tested so many times and wasn't caught, I think it's incredible that the supposedly only clean bloke was streets ahead of everyone else who used drugs.

dave1
20th September 2012, 09:57 AM
I just don't understand why all his teammates were caught and he wasn't, when he got tested more than anyone?Did they save the special undetectable drugs for Lance and give the other blokes the nasty stuff? Ben Cousins never tested positive either....Ben was using masking drugs to flush out toxins.....Maybe Lance was doing the same.

Moe Norman
20th September 2012, 10:14 AM
Except all his team mates weren't caught and some have subsequently admitted taking drugs to the drug testing agency in the US supposedly. The story now can be twisted any way to fit whatever you like. Some think the bloke was a cheat, some don't. I'm pretty sure Lance would be happy with the ambiguity that surrounds the issue. You think it's incredible story to believe he used drugs when he was tested so many times and wasn't caught, I think it's incredible that the supposedly only clean bloke was streets ahead of everyone else who used drugs.

Several have been caught, none have made any admissions without having tested positive first.

I don't really have an opinion either way, I lean towards him most likely being guilty - but some of the justifications and evidence is a bit silly.

I don't think its incredible he was never caught, history says the cheats are often ahead of the testers. I just find it strange that numerous teammates were caught, who supposedly were using the same drugs administered by the same doctor. Just seems a bit weird that he was never caught despite being tested more often, while others who were taking the same stuff were caught.


Ben Cousins never tested positive either....Ben was using masking drugs to flush out toxins.....Maybe Lance was doing the same.

Goodness me you post some dumb shit. This is right up there with the best of it.

dave1
20th September 2012, 12:09 PM
It was a question - see the word maybe..?Ben did use drugs to flush it out....Explain then how lance didnt get caught? When he was the most tested athlete bar Usain Bolt....Many drugs on the banned list are masking agents.....He May have used a drug or substance that flushes out his system but doesnt show up as a positive....Marion Jones - did she test positive? Cant remember but in the end she was guilty.

timah!
20th September 2012, 12:15 PM
Goodness me you post some dumb shit. This is right up there with the best of it.

"like"

dave1
20th September 2012, 12:24 PM
Re - read your post MOE ...I asked same question as you .I believe many use drug users use masking agents.

markTHEblake
20th September 2012, 05:19 PM
Ben Cousins never tested positive either....Ben was using masking drugs to flush out toxins.....Maybe Lance was doing the same. Which performance enhancing drugs was Cousin taking?Apupulco Gold, acid or maybe some Labrador.

TheNuclearOne
20th September 2012, 05:42 PM
Re - read your post MOE ...I asked same question as you .I believe many use drug users use masking agents.

I'd be staggered if ANY weren't. There's been a non stop race between drugs and masking agents for decades dave.

3Puttpete
20th September 2012, 06:25 PM
It was a question - see the word maybe..?Ben did use drugs to flush it out....Explain then how lance didnt get caught? When he was the most tested athlete bar Usain Bolt....Many drugs on the banned list are masking agents.....He May have used a drug or substance that flushes out his system but doesnt show up as a positive....Marion Jones - did she test positive? Cant remember but in the end she was guilty.

From memory, Jones got locked up for telling porkies to the FBI. I don't think she ever tested positive.

Ashes
20th September 2012, 07:40 PM
Re - read your post MOE ...I asked same question as you .I believe many use drug users use masking agents.

Read Tyler's book. He goes into a lot of detail about how they avoided testing positive; saline flushes, micro doping, glow times, subcutaneous v intravenous injections, patches v tablets, the list goes on... It was pretty unlikely that they'd test positive, and when they did (as in Lance's case as well as others) the UCI was pretty open to covering things up.

dave1
21st September 2012, 08:33 AM
From memory, Jones got locked up for telling porkies to the FBI. I don't think she ever tested positive. Didnt she had a parcel intercepted (at post office) ?Could be wrong?

Moe Norman
21st September 2012, 08:53 AM
It was a question - see the word maybe..?Ben did use drugs to flush it out....Explain then how lance didnt get caught? When he was the most tested athlete bar Usain Bolt....Many drugs on the banned list are masking agents.....He May have used a drug or substance that flushes out his system but doesnt show up as a positive....Marion Jones - did she test positive? Cant remember but in the end she was guilty.

FFS, I really didn't want to respond to your idioacy, but you just keep shitting in the thread and making it worse.

Ben Cousins was using recreational drugs that stay in your system for a few days. He didn't need masking agents, he just needed luck. He wasn't being target tested and some AFL players can go 18 months without having to sit a single test.

Further, most masking agents are also banned substances - so using those doesn't do jack shit.

Lance on the other hand is alleged to have been using performance enhancing drugs, some of which are said to stay in your system for months at a time. It's alleged he was using them DURING a race, and despite being drug tested, sometimes within hours of the end of a stage, he never tested positive.

This is not saying I think he's innocent, but please don't be a 3 year old and compare Armstrong with Cousins. One was a junky who got lucky with an imperfect system and no apparent conspiracy or a bunch of doctors helping him around the clock, the other is possibly the most tested athlete in the history of sport in a highly scientific setting where they are tested 'in competition' for performance enhancing drugs.

Bushka
21st September 2012, 09:36 AM
The main reason they could get away with it so systematically was the same as it ever was. The drug cheats are a step ahead of the drug testers right up until they're not. When you can spend enough money things get a lot easier.

Ashes
21st September 2012, 10:11 AM
For most of Armstrong's TdF run, there was no test for EPO or blood transfusions (provided it was your own blood). When the first EPO tests came in, they just started doing regular micro-doses directly into the blood stream that would clear out of the system quickly.

Hamilton only got caught because they accidentally mixed up blood bags and he was given someone elses, which was detectable. Otherwise he sailed through a pro career without popping up on the radar, and he was in it up to his eyeballs.

TourFit
21st September 2012, 10:38 AM
It was systematic, tightly controlled and highly specialised...across the board. Many athletes, many teams.

Lance was just one of the many. Team Telecom from that era were just as bad - Ullrich, Zabel, Riis, Henn, Bolts, Aldag ALL admitted to using EPO. Vinokourov was also in there at that time, and he was pinged later on for offences. Kloden placed 3rd at the Tour when riding for T-Mobile also.

It is hard to ignore what has come out over time. But I agree with what was said earlier, in that I think that Lance is more comfortable with the ambiguity that will surround his UNWILLINGNESS to let it go further! It seems people pretty much now believe he is guilty...but they don't really KNOW for sure.

But one thing is for certain, it is in the past, and cycling will go on.

LarryLong
21st September 2012, 08:28 PM
the other is possibly the most tested athlete in the history of sport

Sorry for quoting a very small part of your post, but isn't this one of those big myths that Armstrong has put out there and people are basically taking without question? I read somewhere that the consensus is that he would be nowhere near the most tested athlete in history, and probably not the most tested athlete in cycling either when you look at other guys who won lots of races throughout the whole year. Armstrong didn't race that often.

It's a bit like the whole 'tested more than 500 times' thing. Here's a good look at that - http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/07/the-legend-of-the-500/

That's not to say that he wasn't tested lots of times, but it does seem to me that his modus operandi is to push a few slogans that sound pretty believable until most of the public buy it without question, and then to use that as the bedrock for his defence in the court of public opinion.

"Never tested positive" also lives in that basket.

dave1
22nd September 2012, 10:14 AM
Ok no issue with posts being deleted well done mods and if you need to whack me with an infraction go for it

back to the topic

How does the US cycling body overide the UCI?

Ashes
22nd September 2012, 01:49 PM
I'm sure the mods will be relieved to have your support..

When has the US cycling body overridden the UCI?

Jarro
22nd September 2012, 01:57 PM
Keep it civil in here please people .....

Dotty
22nd September 2012, 03:40 PM
I'm sure the mods will be relieved to have your support..

When has the US cycling body overridden the UCI?
Traditionally, the national bodies are used to handle the administration of the riders and the races for the UCI.

About 5-8 years ago, David Millar had the book thrown at him (by the Poms, including lifetime Olympic ban) for a EPO infringment, but many European riders just got a slap on the wrist, that would expire before the World champs or other big events. The inaction by national associations allowed the drug culture to fester, until it bursts as a scandal every 5 years.

Contador testing positive at the TdF a few years back, and the Spanish cycling authority dismissed it. It was only after WADA (or UCI?) stepped in, that he eventually had the race taken away from him, and a Giro d'Italia victory, that was earned when he should have been suspended.

Ashes
22nd September 2012, 05:40 PM
Still not clear on when the US cycling body has overridden the UCI.

In Contadors case, the Spanish federations decision was overridden by the CAS (I can't recall who lodged the appeal).

Armstrong was investigated and suspended by USADA rather than the USA Cycling.

dave1
22nd September 2012, 09:43 PM
I'm sure the mods will be relieved to have your support..

When has the US cycling body overridden the UCI?

well they have stripped him of the titles not th UCI

Ashes
22nd September 2012, 10:08 PM
well they have stripped him of the titles not th UCI

USADA has, not the US cycling body...

From what I understand, they're entitled to as well given the UCI is signed up to the WADA Code. I also understand that UCI had a right to effectively call the investigation to take jurisdiction over it, and chose not to.

just
11th October 2012, 07:09 AM
Except all his team mates weren't caught and some have subsequently admitted taking drugs to the drug testing agency in the US supposedly


Several have been caught, none have made any admissions without having tested positive first.
Except George Hincapie, Michael Barry, Tom Danielson etc etc

oncewasagolfer
11th October 2012, 08:14 AM
They said on the radio that today is when the findings of the investigation come out?

Hamo84
11th October 2012, 08:46 AM
http://www.news.com.au/sport/more-sport/lance-armstrong-case-involves-26-witnesses-and-1000-pages-of-supporting-evidence/story-fndukor0-1226493286265

Moe Norman
11th October 2012, 01:23 PM
Except George Hincapie, Michael Barry, Tom Danielson etc etc

we know that now, we didn't know that when I posted

Mububban
11th October 2012, 01:36 PM
Other former Armstrong teammates who testified include Frankie Andreu, Michael Barry, Tom Danielson, Tyler Hamilton, Floyd Landis, Levi Leipheimer, Stephen Swart, Christian Vande Velde, Jonathan Vaughters and David Zabriskie.


If the UCI attempt to throw out this finding over a question of jurisdiction, it should immediately start its own exhaustive investigation and if it doesn't come to the same conclusion, well, I think it would say all that needs saying about the UCI.

As a sports fan I am really saddened to find that one of the great modern fairytale stories was just that - a fairytale. However I appreciate the truth more than fairytales, so I'm glad this is all coming out now.

meh
11th October 2012, 01:49 PM
Greatest witch hunt of all time!! What a joke, who exactly is this Travis T Tygart?!? Some seppo twat looking for his 15 seconds of fame. The guy is a friggin bike rider doing what just about everyone else is doing.

LarryLong
11th October 2012, 02:54 PM
Seems like a perfectly justified witch hunt under the circumstances. If you're Travis Tygart, working for the organisation he does, with the job description he has, how could you justify not going after Armstrong and the team bosses (let's not forget them - they are still in positions of power in cycling) with the body of evidence available?

Moe Norman
11th October 2012, 03:05 PM
can't help but think that his reputation would have suffered less if he just came out and admitted it with the rest.

I heard someone on radio saying tthis morning that to find a clean winner for 6 of his 7 tour wins, they need to go down to 13th place at the earliest and even then its no guarantee.

WBennett
11th October 2012, 05:19 PM
can't help but think that his reputation would have suffered less if he just came out and admitted it with the rest.

I heard someone on radio saying tthis morning that to find a clean winner for 6 of his 7 tour wins, they need to go down to 13th place at the earliest and even then its no guarantee.

Can you find a link to that quote?

WBennett
11th October 2012, 05:34 PM
Just reading the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/oct/10/lance-armstrong-doping-case-live#block-5075d340c0e361310bc6cbba)

One morning a UCI drug tester appeared and started setting up in the common area. This prompted Dr. Celaya to go outside to the car and retrieve a liter of saline which he put under his rain coat and smuggled right past the UCI tester and into Armstrong’s bedroom. Celaya closed the bedroom door and administered the saline to Armstrong to lower his hematocrit, without alerting the UCI tester to their activities. Vaughters recalled that he and Dr. Celaya later “had a good laugh about how he had been able to smuggle in saline and administer it to Lance essentially under the UCI inspector’s nose.”

Ashes
11th October 2012, 08:23 PM
Just finished reading the USADA report.

Whilst I'm pretty much convinced of Armstrong's guilt, I have to say the way the report is written bugs me. It reads almost like a journalists account rather than the legal document that it is, with fairly emotive language.

I find the whole process (if I understand it correctly) a bit strange. Seems USADA is the investigator, prosecutor, judge and jury. Would be better if the decision maker was independant from the investigator/prosecutor.

I also find it strange how the USADA CEO is on the publicity trail.

meh
11th October 2012, 08:38 PM
Seems like a perfectly justified witch hunt under the circumstances. If you're Travis Tygart, working for the organisation he does, with the job description he has, how could you justify not going after Armstrong and the team bosses (let's not forget them - they are still in positions of power in cycling) with the body of evidence available?

He won when? And what year is it now? Your definition of evidence is interesting. I'd call a positive test evidence, they got one of those yet?

Ashes
11th October 2012, 08:42 PM
He won when? And what year is it now? Your definition of evidence is interesting. I'd call a positive test evidence, they got one of those yet?

Yep, they do. Based on what I read in the report, I doubt there's any chance at all Armstrong would get off if the case was heard in a court.

meh
11th October 2012, 08:48 PM
Yep, they do. Based on what I read in the report, I doubt there's any chance at all Armstrong would get off if the case was heard in a court.

So the guy finished riding in 2005, and 7 years later they now have a positive test?!? Yep, I don't find that in the least bit suspicious :roll:

Ashes
11th October 2012, 08:58 PM
So the guy finished riding in 2005, and 7 years later they now have a positive test?!?

Why is that strange or suspicious? The relevant tests didn't exist back then, which is why they were so brazen about doping.

Have you read the USADA report?

The guy tested positive for cortisone in 1999 too. A medical certificate was back dated to get him off; there are witnesses that have testified under oath that it was fabricated.

LarryLong
11th October 2012, 09:05 PM
He won when? And what year is it now? Your definition of evidence is interesting. I'd call a positive test evidence, they got one of those yet?

It's not my definition of evidence, it's the same definition of evidence that is frequently used by law courts all over the civilised world to convict people for all sorts of crimes. You know, Eyewitness testimony - and shitloads of it.

meh
11th October 2012, 09:10 PM
It's not my definition of evidence, it's the same definition of evidence that is frequently used by law courts all over the civilised world to convict people for all sorts of crimes. You know, Eyewitness testimony - and shitloads of it.

And none of these witnesses have axes to grind or dodgy character issues either.

Johnny Canuck
11th October 2012, 09:14 PM
All 26 are dodgy?

Ashes
11th October 2012, 09:19 PM
And none of these witnesses have axes to grind or dodgy character issues either.

Can you please explain why each of the 24 witnesses were dodgy and/or had an axe to grind?

Can you please explain why Armstrong's blood samples from the 1999 Tour contain traces of synthetic EPO?

Can you explain why samples from he 2009 and 2010 Tour show his plasma levels dropping for the first weeks (which is normal) and then bounce back to normal in a day (which is physiologically impossible)?

Do you have any basis for your conspiracy theories at all?

Do you seriously think Armstrong didn't dope?

meh
11th October 2012, 09:20 PM
I really don't understand all the hate. Sad, really. If he's cheated, so what? Doesn't mean too much to me.

Ashes
11th October 2012, 09:23 PM
No hate. I just don't understand how you can have such a strong view with no basis when there's so much evidence to the contrary out there. Conspiracy theories are fun though I guess.

Johnny Canuck
11th October 2012, 09:26 PM
The hate is easy to understand. He is a national and worldwide hero that has been exposed as a cheat.

Ashes
11th October 2012, 09:26 PM
If you do feel like reading it, the report is available here (http://velonews.competitor.com/files/2012/10/Reasoned-Decision.pdf)

It's not as dry and dull as you would expect.

PerryGroves
11th October 2012, 09:29 PM
I really don't understand all the hate. Sad, really. If he's cheated, so what? Doesn't mean too much to me.

I kinda never get people who assume because you question you are ä "hater".

For me the whole Armstrong thing is a disappointment that unfortunately tarnishes (without evidence) LeMond and Indurain, the reason why I liked the Tour so much.

No hate, just, meh.

Ashes
11th October 2012, 09:29 PM
The hate is easy to understand. He is a national and worldwide hero that has been exposed as a cheat.

All his rivals were doing similar things, which is why there's no hate from me. I don't think anyone could have won clean in that era at the TdF. Doesn't make what he did right though, and I've slowly come to the view that it's probably a good thing that they've pursued him.

meh
11th October 2012, 09:31 PM
No hate. I just don't understand how you can have such a strong view with no basis when there's so much evidence to the contrary out there. Conspiracy theories are fun though I guess.

I think you've got it backward, you are the one with all guns blazing wanting Armstrong burnt at the stake. As I said, the guy rode a bike, he didn't kill anyone.

Ashes
11th October 2012, 09:37 PM
I think you've got it backward, you are the one with all guns blazing wanting Armstrong burnt at the stake. As I said, the guy rode a bike, he didn't kill anyone.

Where did I say I wanted him burnt at the stake? That has about as much basis as everything else you've posted.

I have a strong view he's doped, based on a fair amount of reading I've done. I actually used to think it was a witch hunt, being a big fan, but there's too much evidence out there.

Moe Norman
11th October 2012, 09:38 PM
While I am now pretty convinced of his guilt,I read that report and it sounds like something that came out of the AFL match review panel.

It's quite an ordinary report really. But the Hincapie testimony is enough for me.

Ashes
11th October 2012, 09:43 PM
Agree entirely Moe, it is strange the way it's worded. I don't particularly like the process either as I've previously said.

Hux
11th October 2012, 09:49 PM
So the guy finished riding in 2005, and 7 years later they now have a positive test?!? Yep, I don't find that in the least bit suspicious :roll:


Actually he returned to racing in 2009 and finally retired in 2011.


And none of these witnesses have axes to grind or dodgy character issues either.


I really don't understand all the hate. Sad, really. If he's cheated, so what? Doesn't mean too much to me.

Seriously...if he cheated so what? Want to play cards for $1000000 a card? I might cheat but hey so what right.


I think you've got it backward, you are the one with all guns blazing wanting Armstrong burnt at the stake. As I said, the guy rode a bike, he didn't kill anyone.

He rode a bike and was in a professional cheating team. The fact is that pro riding has been inundated with doping for years. USADA must have gotten sick of UCI sticking their heads in the sand and decided to come out with it.
I personally know a guy who went to France and left after he was told that unless he used he would not make it to the next level.
If you want to look at it in a less emotive way perhaps USADA is doing the next Lance a favour and he won't be forced into being a doper just to succeed at the top level.

mike
11th October 2012, 10:03 PM
Armstrong has obtained incredible wealth through cheating. He has also robbed other riders of immortality.

It's tantamount to fraud. Put the prick in jail.

TR66
11th October 2012, 10:06 PM
+1 mike

TheNuclearOne
11th October 2012, 10:13 PM
I think you've got it backward, you are the one with all guns blazing wanting Armstrong burnt at the stake. As I said, the guy rode a bike, he didn't kill anyone.

Would you let him keep his titles? I mean there's no evidence right.

Johnny Canuck
11th October 2012, 10:16 PM
At this stage the titles mean nothing.

damoocow
11th October 2012, 10:45 PM
Do they currently test every rider in the Tour de France?
Curious as to how many were found doped this year if they tested them all

Ashes
11th October 2012, 10:52 PM
I think I've heard it's 4 a stage at least (always the stage winner) and every rider at the start. I'd say it's still possible to dope and get away with it, but much harder and riskier than a few years ago.

damoocow
11th October 2012, 10:56 PM
I think I've heard it's 4 a stage at least (always the stage winner) and every rider at the start. I'd say it's still possible to dope and get away with it, but much harder and riskier than a few years ago.

Given the negative press and fallout this always gets I'm surprised that all of them aren't tested every day or two or is that logistically not possible?

Shadesy
11th October 2012, 11:00 PM
When will Cadel get done?

Ashes
11th October 2012, 11:07 PM
Given the negative press and fallout this always gets I'm surprised that all of them aren't tested every day or two or is that logistically not possible?

Not sure. I think like most sports its trying to strike a balance between a rigorous testing regime and not over imposing on the riders privacy.

Even daily tests leaves it open for cheating, I think I read with micro dosing EPO that it can but out of the system in hours.

MegaWatty
11th October 2012, 11:08 PM
I always believed he was clean. I struggle to believe that anymore.

Something in me just wants to believe it, but there's too much telling me it was all a lie.

Still, he did a shitload for the sport (previously) and tourism in Adelaide!

LarryLong
11th October 2012, 11:20 PM
I guess I'm a hater. I've never been passionate about cycling, but I really can't handle seeing somebody rise to Armstrong's status in the world on the back of blatant cheating. Forget the massive stack of cash, political connections, influence, worldwide celebrity and the endorsements, and consider this. He was banging Sheryl Crow. That, my friends, is a travesty.

Seriously, the guy is so evil, he could be a villain in a Steven King novel.

Ashes
11th October 2012, 11:34 PM
Seriously, the guy is so evil, he could be a villain in a Steven King novel.

I read an article today where a journo said he comes across like a cult leader; fiercely intense, big ideas, and short on details.

3Puttpete
11th October 2012, 11:42 PM
Given the negative press and fallout this always gets I'm surprised that all of them aren't tested every day or two or is that logistically not possible? More tests = more positive tests, it's not in cycling's interests to test. I am happy to acknowledge Armstrong is probably the best grand tour rider we've seen and he dominated or a long time. Whilst he was probably juiced, so was everybody else. Check out the Wikipedia page "Doping at the Tour de France"I don't believe any cyclists are clean but it's not cheating if everybody plays by the same rules.

TheNuclearOne
12th October 2012, 05:33 AM
Seriously, the guy is so evil, he could be a villain in a Steven King novel.

Another in here might cast him as Snow White :D

markTHEblake
12th October 2012, 06:50 AM
If everyone was on the juice doesn't that still make him the best :-)

Lobsta
12th October 2012, 06:56 AM
If everyone was on the juice doesn't that still make him the best :-)

With the exception of the other thousands of amateur and professional riders who refused to juice and therefore couldn't cut it in the TdF.

meh
12th October 2012, 07:00 AM
Another in here might cast him as Snow White :D

He's not snow white but "so evil"?

Toolish
12th October 2012, 07:59 AM
If everyone was on the juice doesn't that still make him the best :-)

Apparently different people react to the juice differently.

E.g. If we were at the same level clean and we both got on the gear you might improve 10% and me only 5% to do with physiological make-up.

Basically it seems in a time where a good portion of the peleton doped Lance had the right profile to be very elite off the gear, had a good program and responded well to the gear.

The thing is, if everyone was clean it MAY have been the same result, or it may have been totally different.

I am not sure where I stand on the issue. Given what has come out in the last couple of days it is hard to argue whether Lance doped. But I would have loved to see him at Kona this weekend. I think the right thing has been done but it is still disappointing.

If he had of come out and admitted it, I am pretty sure it would have been a better outcome overall.

Ashes
12th October 2012, 08:15 AM
Apparently different people react to the juice differently.

E.g. If we were at the same level clean and we both got on the gear you might improve 10% and me only 5% to do with physiological make-up.

Basically it seems in a time where a good portion of the peleton doped Lance had the right profile to be very elite off the gear, had a good program and responded well to the gear.

The thing is, if everyone was clean it MAY have been the same result, or it may have been totally different.

Spot on.

Hamilton mentions in his book that there were riders that they wouldn't give EPO to, as their hematocrit levels were already close to the limit prescribed by authorities. Those riders fell away cos they couldn't compete with the doped riders.

Basically, guys like Hamilton were chosen cos they were performing at a high level and had plenty of room for enhancement. It wasn't enough just to be performing at a high level.

He also explains how they groomed the riders, waiting until they were burnt out and then starting them on small doses of testosterone etc and getting them used to the performance bounces.

It's also interesting that Hamilton started doping on the team before Armstrong, Bruyneel and Ferari came on board.

Moe Norman
12th October 2012, 09:22 AM
He really needs to make an admission imo, but I doubt he ever will.

The demonisation of him is getting a bit out of hand though, given 29 of his teammates have admitted they were all doing it and so was most of the peleton.

I guess a remorseful cheat is more appealing than a delusional one

TourFit
12th October 2012, 10:23 AM
Still a cheat though, that's the important part. The first part merely relates to him personally, and doesn't have any effect except on his own psyche...

Pieface
12th October 2012, 11:12 AM
I read an article today where a journo said he comes across like a cult leader; fiercely intense, big ideas, and short on details.

I wonder how many cult leaders said Journo has met/interviewed?

Cycling is just a crook sport and has been since I was a kid. Not surprised by this at all. The only surprising thing is how indignant people are acting.

3Puttpete
12th October 2012, 11:49 AM
If everyone was on the juice doesn't that still make him the best :-) Too right it does and that's the point I tried to make. IMO there's a difference between breaking rules and cheating. Nobody whinges about cyclists using aerodynamic helmets or different paint schemes to make the bikes lighter on mountain stages. It's just another piece of a professional cyclist's equipment.

Monsta
12th October 2012, 02:35 PM
If everyone was doing it that made him a better rider (and cheater) than all the other riders/cheats. The thing that I donrt get about drug cheats is this, if Lance can be stripped of his TDF victory(s) gold medalists can have their medals taken off them, then how the bloody hell did Andrew Johns get inducted in the Rugby League Hall of Fame (or immortals or what ever it was)??????

Also am I guitly of performance enhancing when I play better with a cold can of wild Turkey and coke in my hand????

Moe Norman
12th October 2012, 04:23 PM
haven't heard much from Robbie McEwen, Chris Rogers or Brad;ey McGee among others for a few days....

WBennett
12th October 2012, 05:14 PM
haven't heard much from Robbie McEwen, Chris Rogers or Brad;ey McGee among others for a few days....

Michael Rogers...

Anyone follow any of these boys on twitter?

3Puttpete
12th October 2012, 06:35 PM
Michael Rogers...Anyone follow any of these boys on twitter? They don't like to talk about it. Nothing from McEwen, Gerrans or Evans

Toolish
12th October 2012, 07:52 PM
Too right it does and that's the point I tried to make. IMO there's a difference between breaking rules and cheating. Nobody whinges about cyclists using aerodynamic helmets or different paint schemes to make the bikes lighter on mountain stages. It's just another piece of a professional cyclist's equipment.
Aero helmets are allowed. Next you are going to say Titanium drivers are cheating.

Paint schemes, never heard of that one the companies can all produce bikes that are underweight so they are actually looking at how to best add weight.

oncewasagolfer
12th October 2012, 07:59 PM
Yes they have to add some weight to abide by the regulations. I will have to burn my copy of 'It's not about the bike' now:)

3Puttpete
12th October 2012, 09:22 PM
Aero helmets are allowed. Next you are going to say Titanium drivers are cheating. Paint schemes, never heard of that one the companies can all produce bikes that are underweight so they are actually looking at how to best add weight. I know aero helmets are allowed. Again, that's my point. Never mind

Mububban
13th October 2012, 12:02 AM
He may have been the best of a doped bunch, but as a sports fan I don't want to watch a doped event. To me sport can be truly inspiring, bring people together, all that sort of cheesy stuff. I'd rather the truth come out and people play fair and square. I have a very strong sense of "fair play" and doping ruins that.

TR66
13th October 2012, 12:35 AM
He may have been the best of a doped bunch, but as a sports fan I don't want to watch a doped event. To me sport can be truly inspiring, bring people together, all that sort of cheesy stuff. I'd rather the truth come out and people play fair and square. I have a very strong sense of "fair play" and doping ruins that. + 1

Ashes
13th October 2012, 07:19 PM
Looks like Matt White is the first Aussie to be implicated http://www.news.com.au/sport/orica-greenedge-directer-matt-white-linked-to-lance-armstrong-drug-scandal/story-fnaqgujp-1226494871368

Webster
13th October 2012, 09:18 PM
What a disgusting excuse for a sport. A complete shambles.

jaybam
13th October 2012, 09:59 PM
Who cares. Drug cheat. Deserves to have it all stripped away .

3Puttpete
13th October 2012, 10:00 PM
Looks like Matt White is the first Aussie to be implicated http://www.news.com.au/sport/orica-greenedge-directer-matt-white-linked-to-lance-armstrong-drug-scandal/story-fnaqgujp-1226494871368 Not just implicated any more, I read he admitted it and has resigned from Green Edge. How's this to wrap things up quickly? All those who say they're clean step forward. Those who don't are confessed dopers, those who do are liars

LarryLong
13th October 2012, 10:30 PM
At least one guy gave up on a cycling career to keep his conscience clean. Hard to imagine how much of a choice this would be if you had been chasing the pro cycling dream since childhood.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19930514

Webster
15th October 2012, 08:00 PM
Four Corners really showing what a despicable lying worthless piece of shit Lance Armstrong is.

Hopefully he ends up in jail for perjury for a very long time.

Ashes
15th October 2012, 08:47 PM
From what I've been reading that seems to be a fair statement. Cheers for the heads up, will check out Four Corners later tonight.

Captain Nemo
15th October 2012, 08:53 PM
I'm 1/2 way thru the report, unbelievable stuff!

golfnotwork
15th October 2012, 08:56 PM
4corners was excellent, good heads up from SEN that it was on.
Lance could be in all ends of shit, lying under oath may well be the start of his Bubba arse reaming experience. After that they will go through everything he is involved in from the drug transportation/use to business practice, rumours already that the Livestrong foundation may be under scrutiny.

3Puttpete
15th October 2012, 09:20 PM
According to livestrong.org "Lance Armstrong's victories in the 1999–2005 Tours de France are awe-inspiring"

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt

WBennett
16th October 2012, 06:26 AM
What a disgusting excuse for a sport. A complete shambles.

Wow Jack, last time I heard that description it was about jumps racing.



It is looking like the UCI and other cycling bosses have been covering this up for years (http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling/sports-chiefs-share-blame-for-vicious-cycle-of-denial-20121015-27mzr.html). It will be interesting to see what happens over the next 2 to 3 years.

markTHEblake
16th October 2012, 07:02 AM
Four Corners really showing what a despicable lying worthless piece of shit Lance Armstrong is. .It must all be true because the ABC always presents balanced unbiased reporting.

dc68
16th October 2012, 07:18 AM
I can't believe how many people are shocked. I've said for years there was no way Armstrong was clean he couldn't be and beat all the other cheats. Joke "sport" in professional terms.

Toolish
16th October 2012, 07:27 AM
All sports have drugs, the way cycling deal with it is part of what gives it a bad name. They do a lot of testing but seem to pick and choose a bit how they deal with the positives. Part of that is because of money.

Also the history in the sport means there is more publicity when things come up.

There have been a fair few track and field athletes busted for drugs in the last few years, but it gets very little media. Operation Puerto which was one of the biggest drug busts in cycling history uncovered drugs in tennis and soccer as well as cycling but they went no further. I am pretty sure a few of the AFL and NRL boys would have got on something at one stage or another.

Right now I truly believe the sport is the cleanest it has been in about 40 years, possibly ever, and if Lance gets thrown in the slammer that will only help going forward.

TourFit
16th October 2012, 02:02 PM
Here is the 4 Corners story...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q03sc8Aoyk0

Mububban
16th October 2012, 02:18 PM
It must all be true because the ABC always presents balanced unbiased reporting.

Having a dig at the ABC is one thing, but if you're ignoring the mounting evidence against Armstrong you appear to be in the minority.

Such a shame that one of the great modern fairytales was exactly that - a tale built on bull****.

Some defend him on the basis of "everyone was doing it" but that just means they should ALL have their results rubbed out if proven guilty.
Also, if he was a pioneer in new techniques and methods to avoid detection, that to me is a "higher level offence" than those who (still illegally) use the end products.

For the true believers who still think he's innocent and being set up - to what end? Why would cycling want to pull down its greatest story? Sure lots of people hate him but it would do more harm than good to cycling if this was a setup. And I see no reason why former teammates would ruin their own reputations and legacies simply to bring one guy down. Where's the motivation to lie about Lance being dirty?

Mountains of evidence, loads of "inner circle" confessions, in detail, overlapping stories from independent witnesses.....I see no way he could be innocent....and it doesn't make me happy to see him busted :(

MegaWatty
16th October 2012, 03:10 PM
Inner circle? Cycling knows about us as well? Oh no. ;)

Pieface
16th October 2012, 03:26 PM
I can see UC enforcing a doping policy for Friday at the GSM :lol: That guy loves to win!

Johnny Canuck
16th October 2012, 03:41 PM
Bunbury, yes. We'll be testing DC and Sms for.diuretics.

Binningup and onwards is fair game. There will be no breathalyzers for Tommyg at any point on the weekend.

Moe Norman
16th October 2012, 04:21 PM
totally think he's guilty, but also think the demonisation of him is getting out of hand.

He wasn't the first to do it, he was a young man like many others who grew up wanting to be a professional cyclist and walked into a culture where if you didn't use drugs, you couldn't compete.

He's obviously no angel, and his refusal to admit his guilt and the empire he built based on those lies does him no favours - but at the end of the day, Tyler Hamilton and the rest of them can't sit in their ivory towers and point the finger at Armstrong as though he's any worse than the rest of them. Especially the blokes that only started admitting guilt and blowing the whistle because they were caught themselves!

TourFit
16th October 2012, 05:10 PM
Inner circle? Cycling knows about us as well? Oh no. ;)

Do they know who's in it?

And can/will they do anything about it?

Pieface
16th October 2012, 06:01 PM
We'll know when USADA starts stripping merit bars ;)

markTHEblake
16th October 2012, 06:58 PM
Having a dig at the ABC is one thing, but if ....

I only said one thing. So whatever follows IF is just a futile attempt to create an argument from nothing.

TourFit
16th October 2012, 11:39 PM
...is just a futile attempt to create an argument from nothing.

An OzGolf specialty!

Mububban
17th October 2012, 12:19 AM
Tyler Hamilton and the rest of them can't sit in their ivory towers and point the finger at Armstrong as though he's any worse than the rest of them.


Tyler Hamilton and the rest of them can't sit in their ivory towers and point the finger at Armstrong as though he's any worse than the rest of them.


If you believe the reports, he is the one who introduced doping to the US Postal team. He was a pioneer in new doping techniques and in staying one step ahead of the testers (which doesn't sound hard). He used his influence to get away with dodgy behaviour, and when that didn't work he tried to crush anyone in his path. I'd say that makes him worse than the others (who yes are also 100% guilty of doping).

Ashes
17th October 2012, 08:40 AM
If you believe the reports, he is the one who introduced doping to the US Postal team. He was a pioneer in new doping techniques and in staying one step ahead of the testers (which doesn't sound hard). He used his influence to get away with dodgy behaviour, and when that didn't work he tried to crush anyone in his path. I'd say that makes him worse than the others (who yes are also 100% guilty of doping).

That is rubbish and blatantly untrue. Hamilton was on the team that became US Postal before Armstrong, and they already had a doping regime. Armstrong was on Mototorola at the time.

All the other contenders at the time were running similar programs with EPO, testosterone, steroids etc. USADA and the media are making it out that US Postal were playing an entirely different game when they weren't. Apparently Ulrich was flying in and out of South Africa for some synthetic blood doping trying that was there.

US Postal was just a bit more organised and smarter about how they doped. About the only thing I've read that they pioneered was the microdosing when the EPO test came out.

Hamilton admits that when he left Postal to compete against Armstrong, the other team was doing pretty much the same things already, just slightly different.

What supposedly set Armstrong apart was his intimidation of anyone that tried to speak out, and his influence and bribery of officials. But then, others could easily have been doing similar things and we just haven't heard about it yet.