A straightforward question: is there any DIRECT evidence Armstrong is cheating, rather than just the fact that he wins a lot?
Not to point out the blindingly obvious, but it is a logical necessity that SOMEONE has to be the best at every sport. Armstrong, perhaps, is simply the best. Was Wayne Gretzky cheating? Does Ian Thorpe cheat? What about Babe Ruth, Martina Navratilova, Jerry Rice, Oscar de la Hoya, Nadia Camaneci (sp?) or (insert elite athlete here.)
Unless someone can produce actual objective evidence Armstrong is cheating, I would have to assume this talk in the press of him being a cheater is merely the typical talk that follows in the wake of the jealousy directed at any dominant athlete. I am certainly not foolish enough to think cheating isn’t a widespread problem, but show me the evidence.
While I defer to your cycling knowledge, the problem I have with your presumption of Armstrong’s guilt is the same I have with JFK conspiracy theorists: Over the years, people talk. Money is waived. Partnerships and friendships wane or become adversarial. Loyalties are lost. Jealousy leads people to rat out former friends. Someone who would go on record about his alleged cheating could probably land $100,000 from a tabloid, maybe even spin it into a quickie book.
Also this: Someone above objected to Armstrong’s tendency to resort to legalistic terminology when he dismisses rumors (“I’ve passed every test”) that he cheats. My point is this: When denials are no longer heard and the only factual evidence are the results from myriad scientific (if imperfect) tests, I too would cite my 100 percent pass record.
BTW, how often is Armstrong tested? Does anyone both to permanently store blood samples, for the day when future lab techs have the techniques to detect present-day cheating? That alone might be a powerful deterrent.
Well, no, there aren’t any tainted blood samples, but, again, there weren’t any for Millar either. Either the drugs and masking agents are advanced enough or the testing methods are too crude:
2003 World Championship TT Champion. He ain’t nobody. What the UCI should really do is potentially offer some reduction in sentencing for useful information in making it harder to defeat anti-doping measures.
I don’t think that he’s out to wreck LA, but take a fair look at what people are saying about him. Emma O’Reilly didn’t wipe down the team cars, she was integral to the daily operation of the team, was well liked, and left on good terms. She was also not paid for her story.
In a rare show of intelligence from the UCI, blood samples will be frozen for testing at later dates for this Tour. Allow me to make myself clear; if Lance is doped, I hardly expect him to be the only one.
Oh, and here is Manzano, who used to ride for Kelme-Costa Blanca. He did get fired and does have a lot of reasons to bad-mouth his old team, but he also certainly did unexpectedly collapse during a stage of the 2003 Tour.
What’s more, he seems to have some rather in-depth and specific knowledge of doping agents.
Keep in mind that Manzano is another rider subjected to the same anti-doping controls as Armstrong, and he never tested positive for anything.
Well, jealousy is a big factor. And people are definitely jealous of Lance. I’ve heard people argue that Lance shouldn’t be allowed to compete because the cancer gave him an unfair advantage. :rolleyes:
From Rick’s post above:
Yeah, lucky Lance!
Now, that’s not to say that he isn’t doping. But if he is, I imagine he’s doping to the same degree as everyone else. That doesn’t make it okay, but it does mean that the playing field is at least somewhat level.
Cycling is in the grips of doping like almost no other sport. Look at the 1998 Tour de France in which a car linked to the Festina team was found to contain 234 doses of erythropoietin (EPO), 80 flasks of human growth hormone, 160 capsules of testosterone, 60 pills of a blood-thinning agent, and a three-week supply for nine riders of “Belgium Mix,” a stay-up-all-night cocktail of cocaine, heroin, caffeine and corticosteroids. There were also syringes and boxes of intravenous drips.
Even that wasn’t the end of it. Seven teams dropped out of the Tour and fewer than half the riders completed the race. Many riders quit before they got caught. The riders went on strike not in protest of doping, but in protest of the investigations of doping. Almost no one payed attention to Marco Pantani’s victory.
Pantani himself later failed a drug test and eventually died of a heart attack.
When French cycling star Richard Virenque finally confessed to doping (after denying it for a long time) he compared it to putting air in your tires. He said if you were not doping you were not preparing for the race. Such a person not only wouldn’t win but would also let down all his teammates. Virenque is racing again. He is in 21st place in the Tour right now.
It didn’t end in 1998, of course. A rider who stayed reasonably close to Armstrong last year failed a test during the race and David Millar’s expulsion this year are some of the more prominent riders to go down in doping scandals.
It seems as if the whole field is doping and Armstrong continually defeats all of them. A few years ago he was absolutely demolishing his opponents, today he is merely dominant.
It is very hard to believe that Armstrong is blowing away all his doped-up competitors without doping himself.
Welcome to 21st century sports. I suspect the first genetically modified athletes are not too far off.
A cool cheat I heard about, many years ago before designer drugs became the norm, was a cyclist who had got to the top of a mountain and an accomplice passed him a 2kg weight to add to his downhill descent!
Which got me wondering about the newspapers that are passed to some riders at the top of mountains to keep them warm on the downhill. Would it be against the rules to pass them, say, the Sunday New York Times?
LA prerares for the Tour almost to the exclusion of all else, pretty much everything in the season before the Tour is preparation, and a goodly chunk of the rest of the season is geared to maintaining himself in the best of condition ready to make an assault on the Tour the following year.
Although LA is now one of the greats of cycling, in my mind you can’t make him out to be in the top five even, because the others all had to compete right across the whole season and were capable of winning any of the big tours.
Merckx, Anquetil, Hinault, and to my mind Coppi, maybe Bobet all outrank him, winning more individual stages, or with Coppi, his career was interrupted by WWII and would have been well capable of two or three more tour wins.
Most of the other riders were also capable of winning 6 day track events too, as well as the early season Belgian classics.
As a Tour rider LA is peerless in most respects, ok so he hasn’t won as many stages as some of the others but his record is undeniable.
It does surprise me that Lemond should weigh in with criticism since he was one of those who pioneered building an entire season around the Tour, all LA has done is to take that idea to its logical conclusion.
Resting heart rate: 32-34
VO2ml/kg: 83.8
Max power at VO2: 600 watts
Max heart rate: 201
Lactate Threshold HR: 178
Time Trial HR: 188-192
Pedal rpm’s during TT: 95-100
Climbing rpm’s: 80-85, sometimes faster when attacking
Average HR during endurance rides (4-6 hrs): 124-128
Average watts during endurance rides: 245-280 watts
Training miles/hours, endurance rides: 5- 6 hrs / 100-130miles
There is no question that Armstrong trains to the max. He is genetically gifted for the competition. That doesn’t eliminate the possibility of doping.
I believe there was testimony from a doctor that he was given subtle hints that the team (that Armstrong was training with) wanted performance enhancing drugs. When he refused, he was dropped.
That is just another piece in the puzzle.
Why was Armstrong’s garbage moved 100 miles before being discarded? (It had syringes in it, among other things, although they could have been used for vitamins or other legal purposes.)
I have reached no conclusions on his guilt or innocence. But if his or any other blood samples test positive for illegal performance-enhancing drugs at a later date, I think that those titles involved should be stripped from him.
Officials may have to go way back in the pack before they find someone whose blood isn’t tainted.
I’m surprised that LeMond is being as openly accusing of Armstrong as he is. I’m not a Tour-aholic, but wasn’t LeMond’s Tour participation in a time when many now-banned substances were legal? And drug controls and testing were not what they are today? I understood that even drugs that were banned back then were in widespread use in spite of the ban.
Anyone have any more specific knowledge than my fuzzy recollection?
First, let me thank everyone for keeping this thread mainly fact-driven.
I stick by my earlier remark: If he’s doping, someone, some where, will eventually talk. That said, all the heresay really steals his thunder.