What happened with Trek and Lemond Bikes? I seem to have a story that he wanted to do his stuff independent from Trek and Lance told Trek to Kibosh his plans.
Well, as I said above, I don't get into this "cult of personality" Greg vs. Lance BS. It defeats the purpose and people have already come down on one side of the other. Pointless debate. BUT, from the WSJ this week http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124459634335000647.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Not sure if its pointless, but it seems that Lance plays hardball and Greg wants to swing for the fences. The questions are: 1) Is Greg going after lance because of the Trek deal? 2) Is Greg going after Lance because he thinks Lance is a doper? 3) Is Greg going after Lance because he loves the sport? 4) All of the above I'd be willing to be that Greg is the one that brings Lance down, if any one does bring him down.
The pointless part is the discussion about it. It's a freaking soap opera of "He said, (S)he said". Greg has been going off on Lance for quite a long time and before the Bike deal thing fell apart. Greg is using semi-guerrilla tactics here, showing up at press conferences, putting Lance on the spot because of his associations with a Dr., etc... You need more than that Greg. It's one of the things that bugs me about Greg. BUT, people can call him jealous, whiny, whatever, but he is absolutely correct about doping and how crap the testing and enforcement is of it. He is wrong to just use Lance as some focal point for doping, but now it is complicated even more so because of the bike deal with Trek. And I like Greg.
Number 4. And I'd love nothing more than for LeMond to bring Lance down, Frankie Andreu tried and failed, but he won't be able to, Armstrong is just way too powerful. The only thing that could bring Lance down is some pee in a test tube, and I highly doubt that will ever happen.
I'm thinking Lance could beat the Pee in a cup test, but the ex-wife saying she saw him taking stuff or something like that might open up a new can of worms. As for he said/he said - that's how it works. Jose Canseco said a lot of stuff and was chastised for it - now he's proven a reliable source.
I just read a very interesting article on doping from Outside magazine. The author doped for something like a year to get ready for the Paris-Brest-Paris ultracycling race. Very interesting read.
That's an older article right? have to be honest, if someone offered me HGH, I'd probably take it. Not for long, but just to see how it works and how my body reacts. I should probably read that article again to see if I have forgotten something I shouldn't.
I really don't fall on either side of the fence, however, It'd be interesting to see your evidence against Armstrong.
This rather long interview makes a pretty good case for the idea that Armstrong used EPO at least at the 99 Tour. After reading it, I wouldn't be surprised in the least if he doped. And I'm a Lance fan.
A lot of my assumption against Lance stem pretty much from that article, most of it also appears in this book [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Lance-Landis-Inside-American-Controversy/dp/B0027IQBAG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1244817177&sr=8-1"]Amazon.com: From Lance to Landis: Inside the American Doping Controversy at the Tour de France: David Walsh: Books[/ame], which for me was completely eye opening. When faced with the majority of the evidence in that article Ed Coyle's only response was that Lance is simply "one in a billion", a statement which doesn't really hold much value, especially in the context of the tainted cycling scene. Another interesting fact; Lance failed a test for cortisone cream in 1999, which, back then, was not on the UCI banned list. Cortisone injections have been linked to............ TESTICULAR CANCER. Could just be a coincidence but still pretty interesting.
He's a princess that can't stand not being the golden-boy anymore is really what it boils down to. I also find the fact that his statements are pretty much baseless to be an act of a bitter person. If you can't back up your comments why make them? Comedian How do we know he was truly clean throughout his career? Because he said he was? I remember him riding with explosive diarrhea during Le Tour when in reality he shouldn't passed out from dehydration. Certainly he must have doped no? The Cannibal whinging about the good old days? This is the same guy that once said "no one has ever won the TDF on water and pasta alone.....no one" He's openly voiced his displeasure of the explosion of doping in cycling but unlike Lemond he does not get up on a soap box and make baseless claims. Remember the Great One himself has been busted for doping at least two or three times. I asked above, if Eddy had to dope to win then how did Lemond? In terms of talent Lemond couldn't even wrap the Cannibals handlebars. How is Armstrong's counterattacking any different than Lemond's implications other than in the order from which they started? Let's face it, they weren't implications as much as outright allegations. Nice premise for a new thread??? This could lead to an interesting debate, anyone feel free to start it up. Really? Based off what? Lance also had written permission from the UCI to take the aforementioned cream. As far as cortisone as a "dope", especially in the form of a cream there is no way. I have been receiving regular cortisone injections for more than ten years after being diagnosed with Lupus. All it truly may do if even used as a dope is bolster the immune system. Just my two cents. For the record, I rank Lance as my third to fifth favorite cyclist so I believe I can approach this conversation fairly objectively. One thing I love about being an American citizen is the fact that your are innocent until proven guilty. I can tell you from experience that is not the case everywhere. If Lance doped let someone simply and indisputably prove it. They have done it with many others so do it with him. He's not that powerful, he really isn't.
The fact is that many have tried to prove it but their claims just fall on death ears, either Lance's supreme legal team settles it or people just don't want to believe it's true. There's both the cases of Frankie Andreu and Mike Anderson, Lance's former personal assistant, that were never fully examined by the authorities and have just been allowed to wash away without question. Short of catching him with a needle in his arm, guys like David Walsh are providing enough evidence to provide a solid case against Armstrong. I don't despise the man, it's just, unlike LeMond, the numbers don't add up and that makes me extremely suspicious.
Their claims fell on deaf ears due them being nothing more than claims. Provide the definitive evidence and he'll go down...he is arguably one of the most tested and scrutinized athletes in the world, surely gaining one conclusive test can't be that hard can it? Armstrong is a wealthy man but c'mon. You mention Mike Anderson and aside from his word had zero proof that Armstrong doped. He was fired by Armstrong wasn't he? Same rubbish with Frankie and his allegation based off what his wife may or may not have heard. If Lance is dirty then just catch him with the dope in his blood or the needle in his arm. It really is that simple, that's how it is supposed to be no? Now how do Armstrong's numbers and Lemond's numbers not add up? It's not like Lemond didn't have an amazing career in his own right. Two worlds and three TDF's not to mention countless podiums is nothing to scoff at.
Former world road champ Astarloa among 5 targeted by UCI http://www.velonews.com/article/93525/former-world-road-champ-astarloa-among-5-targeted-by-uci The Union Cycliste Internationale is seeking disciplinary measures against five riders based on results from its so-called “biological passport” program. The five — 2003 world road champion Igor Astarloa, Pietro Caucchioli (Lampre-N.G.C.), Francesco De Bonis (Serramenti PVC Diquigiovanni), Ruben Lobato Elvira and Ricardo Serrano (Fuji-Servetto) — are said to be in “apparent violation of the Anti-Doping Rules on the basis of the information provided by the blood profile in their biological passports,” the UCI charged in a press release Wednesday.
Panel says Boonen didn't take cocaine A panel of independent experts has concluded that Quick Step’s Tom Boonen did not actually ingest the cocaine for which he tested positive six weeks ago, Belgian media reported Thursday. http://www.velonews.com/article/93553/panel-says-boonen-didn-t-take-cocaine
Yet again more proof that doping control in cycling is nothing more than words. Performance enhancing or not it is still illegal for a cyclist to use and with Tom's past history of coke use to have "experts" say it was coincidental is just pathetic. I couldn't find anywhere in the artical any suggestions as to how the drug got in his system. I guess next they will confirm that women can get pregnant from toilet seats.
You're right, it's venerial disease from toilet seats. unless you're a stripper in which case it's a requirement. It was a gust of wind that blew the coke past and air conditioner which changed its direction causing it to go past and ceiling fan and down to two blabbering women which in turn sent it into Tom's nose. see above.
UCI doping chief says passport program shows vast majority of riders are clean http://www.velonews.com/article/93542/uci-doping-chief-says-passport-program-shows-vast-majority One blip on the anti-doping landscape is autologous blood doping – when athlete's take out, then reinject, their own blood to enhance their performance. There is no definitive test for autologous blood doping, but Gripper and UCI president Pat McQuaid have said that the monitoring under the passport program can prove valuable in that effort. "With the biological passport we can see evidence of that type of behavior,” McQuaid said last week, “and it's pretty solid evidence." ---------- I guess we will need more time to see how this type of testing evolves and if it can work out the "kinks" in terms of autologous blood doping. Is the test viable or simply the best, maybe only way to catch doping? Or, should they also, liek LeMond say, read the power meters as well?
Really interesting article at SI.com about American and European attitudes towards cycling and doping. Definitely worth a read.