BBC News - Lance Armstrong ends fight against doping charges
Given up fighting the doping accusations. But the US doping agency has now demanded his Tour de France titles are removed. It's yet to be seen if they will actually do it.
Printable View
BBC News - Lance Armstrong ends fight against doping charges
Given up fighting the doping accusations. But the US doping agency has now demanded his Tour de France titles are removed. It's yet to be seen if they will actually do it.
big fat donkey :mad: :(
Revisionist history
1999: Alex Zulle
2000: Jan Ullrich
2001: Jan Ullrich
2002: Joseba Beloki
2003: Jan Ullrich
2004: Andréas KLÖDEN
2005: Ivan Basso
2006: Oscar Pereiro Sio
2007: Alberto Contador
2008: Carlos Sastre
2009: Alberto Contador
2010: Any Schleck
2011: Cadel Evans
2012: Bradley Wiggins
Jan Ullrich was found guilty of doping. His results from 2005 onwards were nullified. Interesting that he is could now be awarded tour wins.
I'm not moral absolutist but this case is so murky it seems like the USADA are adopting a 'guilty until proven innocent' mentality... which I find reprehensible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
And Bjarne Riis who has admitted he was on drugs during his tour win, and yet his win still stands.
Revising history at this point is, well, pointless. Especially since it's almost certain that Armstrong did in fact dope, based on the fact that around that time everyone was doping! So if we assume that everyone was doping - Armstrong was still the worthy winner!
Yes, and they are declaring his TdF wins void - without any authority to do so. It's far from certain the Tour de France organisers will take this view.Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew
1999
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Alex Zülle (‘98 busted for EPO)
3. Fernando Escartín (Systematic team doping exposed in ‘04)
4. Laurent Dufaux (‘98 busted for EPO)
5. Ángel Casero (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
2000
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Christophe Moraue (‘98 busted for EPO)
5. Roberto Heras (‘05 busted for EPO)
2001
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Andrei Kivilev
5. Igor González de Galdeano (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
2002
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Raimondas Rumšas (Suspended in ‘03 for doping)
4. Santiago Botero (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Igor González de Galdeano (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
2003
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Alexander Vinokourov (Suspended in ‘07 for CERA)
4. Tyler Hamilton (Suspended ‘04 for blood doping)
5. Haimar Zubeldia
2004
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Andreas Kloden (Named in doping case in ‘08)
3. Ivan Basso (Suspended in ‘07 for Operacion Puerto ties)
4. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Jose Azevedo (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
2005
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Ivan Basso (Suspended in ‘07 for Operacion Puerto ties)
3. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Fransico Mancebo (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Alexander Vinokourov (Suspended in ‘07 for CERA)
One of the most drug tested sportsman alive. Never missed a test, NEVR FAILED A TEST.
Thats good enough for me.
The guy is my hero, and always will be.
The guy was given about 5% chance survival, from his testicular cancer, which had spread to his brain and lungs. Read his book to find out what chemo did to his body. To get back on a bike is something, to be the best in the worl, and win 7 tours is something else.
Steve
They can take away Lance Armstrong's 7 Tour victories but they can't take away his moon landing.
you could say the same about Marion Jones. Then she eventually admitted that she had been cheating.Quote:
Originally Posted by big_sw2000
Marion Jones - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Idiot. That was Louis Armstrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
Absolutly true. Lance Armstrong has been, and always wil be a hero to me. Probley makes me a little bias but so what.Quote:
Originally Posted by BleAivano
Lance Armstrong's statement. Makes a god read.
Lance Armstrong
Steve
If all of Armstrong's tours were awarded to the best-classified riders who had never been involved in any doping scheme that we know about, the list would look like this:
1999 Olano (6th)
2000 Nardello (10th)
2001 Kivilev (4th)
2002 Sastre (10th)
2003 Zubeldia (5th)
2004 Sastre (8th)
2005 Evans (7th)
O|Ż|_Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
I must humbly tender my apology.
I see skies of blue; clouds of white,
The bright blessed days; the dark sacred night,
And I think to myself what a wonderful world.
It all makes sense, how could he have written this truthfully unless he'd seen all of the "wonderful world" at once.
Two wins for Sastre, not bad!Quote:
Originally Posted by N4D13
Nothing has changed since then they still are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
Maybe they are maybe they aren't. We know they are going slower so perhaps they aren't doping, perhaps they are doping less.
Since the introduction of biological passports it's harder to dope and get away with it. Having read Team Sky's: Sky's the limit book it was stated that various riders biological passports were analysed and Team Sky came to the conclusion that some riders were doping and immediately ruled them out as potential riders. Team Sky have also made the decision to never employ anyone who had been found guilty of doping offences.
I went cycling with Bradley Wiggins on a route he uses for training a few days ago. It was one of the hardest physical challenges that I've put myself though. I'm not saying I condone doping but I can see why some are driven to dope.
Maybe you should take all the drugs and try the ride again, for comparison?
I'd love to believe that this is true, however I'm fearful that they're just paying lip service. The way that Froome didn't have a bad day on the TdF in particular makes me sceptical.Quote:
Originally Posted by GridGirl
A cycling forum I visit has had discussion about doping in professional cycling for a long time and it has some good insight in to the matter. ;)
Few weeks ago there were two interesting articles
Ashenden: Understanding USADA’s Armstrong charges
and
Behind the Scenes of the Contador CAS hearing with Michael Ashenden | NY Velocity - New York bike racing culture, news and events
The second one was very interesting, if bit technical.
Is it really over for Lance? Over?
Reminds me of.....
D-Day: War's over, man. Wormer dropped the big one.
Bluto: Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!
Otter: Germans?
Boon: Forget it, he's rolling.
Bluto: And it ain't over now. 'Cause when the goin' gets tough...
[thinks hard]
Bluto: the tough get goin'! Who's with me? Let's go!
[runs out, alone; then returns]
Bluto: What the f*ck happened to the Delta I used to know? Where's the spirit? Where's the guts, huh? "Ooh, we're afraid to go with you Bluto, we might get in trouble." Well just kiss my *ss from now on! Not me! I'm not gonna take this. Wormer, he's a dead man! Marmalard, dead! Niedermeyer...
Otter: Dead! Bluto's right. Psychotic, but absolutely right. We gotta take these *******s. Now we could do it with conventional weapons that could take years and cost millions of lives. No, I think we have to go all out. I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part.
Bluto: We're just the guys to do it.
D-Day: Let's do it.
Bluto: LET'S DO IT!
What I have found interesting in the whole USADA debacle is that the USADA have shown to my knowledge absolutely no interest in investigating George Hincapie. He's American and was Lance's loyal domestique during every one of Armstrong's Tour de France wins. He's falls under the same remit as Armstrong and was there every step of the way including in the less successful years after Lance's comeback. Maybe only having four Tour de France stage wins doesn't warrant an investigation. :s
Wasn't Hincapie one of the ones that was trading information about Armstrong in return for them turning a blind eye.Quote:
Originally Posted by GridGirl
I've always suspected that Lane was high as a kite but it still feels a bit wrong that they've stripped his wins when they haven't really brought forward much proof.
I suppose it's a possibility that Hincapie was trading information but I've never seen anything actually stating who the team mates that have testified against Lance actually are. When there are 20 plus riders in a team and you take into account a period in excess of 15 years it could easily be anyone of say 100 to 150 riders that have spoken out.
My honest opinion is that he probably did dope. They all doped during those days. You can't change history but maybe if you're the USADA you can.
I studied elite athletic physiology for a degree with a particular focus on cyclists because these guys are the ultimate aerobic exercise machines.Quote:
Originally Posted by GridGirl
Their exercise tolerance and therefore competitiveness is based on three factors:
1)Their cardiac output which can be increased with training.
2)Their blood oxygen carrying capacity which is what stuff like EPO increases but otherwise they can't do much about.
3)Their VO2Max, or their maximum oxygen uptake capacity in their lungs which is something they can do nothing to improve.
They can improve 1) by training to a certain level but all these guys are fit so they are equal in this regard. When it comes to 2) they are either equal or they are on easily identifiable drugs or have to self transfuse. Either way these methods are detectable. 3) they can do nothing about.
For motorsports guys it would be as if drivers were given a maximum engine capacity randomly at the start of their careers which they could never change. However talented they were, however well they trained if another guy had a higher VO2max you could do nothing to close the gap with them except for taking drugs. Given how competitive these guys are I really am not surprised one bit that they're tempted to take drugs. Must be heartbreaking to realise you'll never be the best regardless of how hard you train or how well you do on the day because your lung capacity isn't big enough.
At least until those and the next ones in the queue are all found guilty of doping. Truth is they all did it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
Just another modern witch hunt. Makes them feel 'strong'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew
Interesting reads, however both of them show that a rather high level of subjectivity was/is involved in the proceedings, they can never explain what exactly is the cause that produces the suspicious results and they are mostly guessing instead of pinpointing the cause.Quote:
Originally Posted by janneppi
With the level of guessing involved a scientist would have a hard time to have an article accepted in a high level publication ( for example Nature) let alone use it as a base in court.
Your conclusion to point 1 is misleading and I would say not true. Even though they are all fit they are not all equal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malbec
Tell me about it. no3.... :bigcry:Quote:
Originally Posted by Malbec
Elite level moto-cross guys are up there with bicycle guys,,,a little different from a duration of work being between 30 and 45 minutes and much much harsher enviroment (bicycle guys are not getting showered with rocks coming at them at who knows what speed and approaching the rocks at 10-75 mph--that breaks fingers and teeth and noses and toes) or breathing in what should be choking dust, mud, cow-poo, bugs, or enduring repeated compressive forces ( I lost 40mm in height in 5 serious years--and 35 years later had crushed the nerves exiting the spine in 2 places; taller guys lost more height).
Years of training and to know you are stupid strong but your lungs just won't get any better is very frustrating...especially when this is what you are doing to pay the rent.
And yes it was really odd watching guys you'd known since forever suddenly in 2 years go from being a fit but kinda skinny Swede bulk up to something that looked like "the Hulk".. Hmmmmm. never knew we needed to have necks like tree trunks. :uhoh:
I think the only real solution to the problem is clear, remove the ban on performance enhancing drugs. In all sports. It's silly to pretend that any sport at the professional level its played at these days is purely about ability. Every single sport requires not only for the athlete to be talented, but also for them to have sufficient financial support to have access to the best training facilities, the best "legal" performance enhancing supplements, the best doctors, etc.
Performance enhancing drugs and human augmentation technology is a very interesting area of research, and some of the things discovered and developed in sport might have benefits for all of us. You are never, ever going to be able to eradicated the use of what are currently considered illegal performance enhancers, and the only way to ensure that at an elite level, everyone is on an even playing field, is to to have a lassiez-faire approach to enhancement.
Because they are highly dangerous. EPO for example can thicken the blood so much that you'll just have a heart attack and die.
New doping techniques and technologies are always a step ahead of the doping tests and that will always be like that.
IMHO doping is not the cause it's just the symptom of a deeper cause and it is that cause which should instead be investigated and eradicated.
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
True but luckily now they can keep the samples for five years and do the tests again with new developed methods, at least one athlete was banned from London Olympics because of this.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
One dopehead beat lots of other dopeheads lots of times. He's still the best... dopehead.
speaking of dopeheads . . . this forum has some cases :look:
specially in the cases where topics go round and around and around . . . . . . .
Don't be so harsh on yourself. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by race aficionado