Livestrong

[Kranswurm]

My question would be the following: Would Lance have won 7 TDF's titles had he and his team not have doped?

 

For all practical purposes we can assume that most of his teammates doped (has been proven). I remember that one year with Floyd riding so fast even Lance struggled to keep up......

 

Yes he is a superior athlete and you still need that will power even if everyone taking part is doping........

 

I just wonder....

The rest were up to their eyeballs as well so it was a level playing field to a certain extent

[GrumpyOldGuy]

I agree. Therefore I call on the following witnesses to testify about how we have gotten it wrong and that the sport of cycling is actually very clean... :-

 

Dr Ferrari

The Festina Management Team

Floyd

Tyler

Jan

Ivan

Alexander

Mr Valverde

Francisco

Jose Guitierrez

Roberto Heras

Bjarne

 

to name a few

 

Hmm, I think you really only need Dr Ferrari to come clean and all will be revealed.

 

Unfortunately, I think things were going pear shaped long before Dr Ferrari who has become quite correctly I think a bit of a scape goat, but remember Dr Francesco Conconi (who developed the Conconi test) was actually Dr Ferrari's tutor, so if he was involved then its anyone's guess how far back the culture of doping go's.

 

Just as a by the by, Dr Conconi was instrumental in trying to get the UCI to raise the haematocrit level from the standard of 50% to 54% (now I wonder why ) saying that, only at that level will it become a health risk, not a cheating risk mind, but a health risk, because at the time naturally, they had no test for r-EPO. Thank Goodness Hein Verbruggen at the time dismissed the suggestion, probably one of the better decisions he ever made.

Edited January 10, 2012 by GrumpyOldGuy

[JGR]

I'm not sure what you're reading and I have tired of posting links the fanboys don't want to read. Your understanding of testing seems sketchy to say the least. Have you heard of masking agents, the fact that the EPO test did not arrive until at least 5 years after usage thereof became commonplace, the fact that nearly everybody who stood under lance on the TDF podium eventually got implicated or caught, the UCI's record on fairness and corruption, the mountain of witnesses and testimony against LA, his long-term association with the foremost doping doctors on the planet, the fact that the US government is investing large sums of money in bringing a case against him etc etc. I doubt anything I say here will make any difference.

 

I was also a fan on some level, read the books etc. For me this is a fascinating story of sporting corruption within the sport that I love, it's not about fanboy or hater.

 

It just seems silly to suspend belief at this point. Father Christmas and the Easter Bunny come to mind.

 

Sketchy no but also no expert or more importantly pretend to be. Yes I am very familiar with what a masking agent is and that tests now are a lot more accurate. I am happy to learn any new stuff about testing you might know and happy to review all materials. Not happy to jump on the bandwagon and tarnish his name, reputation and achievements without the necessary proof is all. Im also no legal eagle but i think in a US criminal cases there is a statute of limitations so im not sure how dodgy voicemails from 15yrs ago will hold up. Same goes for witness evidence which i believe has been proven to be the less accurate of all evidence.

 

As you say its silly to suspend belief - most of the world still think jesus or similar exsist. He is just as easy to find as the easter bunny.

 

But i think you said it best .... it is a faciniating story and that is why people will not just leave it. Would they pursue him the same if he never won? Sensationalism at its best

[GrumpyOldGuy]

My question would be the following: Would Lance have won 7 TDF's titles had he and his team not have doped?

 

 

Yeah, I dont know, maybe, I think he was possibly still a step above most, but I guess we will never know.

 

Personally I dont really care, for me sport is about the spectacle at the time and he created some amazing spectacles, much like 'Berto today.

 

Had he not been there, doubtless someone else would have stepped up and created the visuals, and possibly we would be discussing them, so was he a fraud? I dont know,... only he can answer that, and it seems he is not talking.

[Lucky Luke.]

To sum it up, I think he was a great athlete, but a piss poor human being.

 

I think you are on the money. Lance was without a doubt the best there was for many years, he just wasn't playing the game we thought he was. There was much more to it than that.

[Wayne Potgieter]

You people are so arrogant and full of bulls#it.

 

I dont get you, you all need a whipping of note, the kind the cops used to give a few years back.

 

You need to be publicly humiliated and smacked around the ears.

 

For petes sake...whats wrong with pineapple on a pizza???

 

[splat]

I agree. Therefore I call on the following witnesses to testify about how we have gotten it wrong and that the sport of cycling is actually very clean... :-

 

Dr Ferrari

The Festina Management Team

Floyd

Tyler

Jan

Ivan

Alexander

Mr Valverde

Francisco

Jose Guitierrez

Roberto Heras

Bjarne

 

to name a few

 

For a fanny mechanic (gynecologist) he did some interesting work!

[Witkop]

The article is very interesting. The basic premise of the article is that LA has misrepresented the work which the livestrong foundation does, and that in effect the foundation is a slush fund for CANCER advocacy rather than a funding conduit for research. He some how tries to link this misrepresentation to a perceived or speculated dishonestly regarding LA's cycling career. He also speculates whether the foundation can survive withut LA and visa versa.

 

Obviously, all the incongruencies regarding the movement of funds etc mokes it sound like who is paying for the ANC 100 year bash or Boesak accountancy.

 

Just like the weirdo Bobby Fischer elevated chess in the USA in the 1970's despite being a slightly mad, LA has also increased the profile of cancer awareness and sport in the USA, despite being a most unlikeable person. The use desperately needs physical fitness and caner awareness, so no mater how evil Lance may be he in a twisted way is doing good. In the end he is doing more for the general health and fitness of the USA than say Eddy Merckx has done for health and fitness in Belgium, or Sir Hoy has done in the UK.

 

So it is easier to find fault with those that try than thos that do nothing.

[Delgado]

Ah good, a thread to follow while i'm eating lunch

Your office at Loftus???

[TNT1]

Your office at Loftus???

 

Scotty's a tappet?

[Garfield2010]

Ok but lets look at it from a different angle. Had Lance never had cancer he would not have won even one Tour De France.

 

He said himself in his biographies he would forever have been a rider like cancellara or Jens Voight. Cancer helped him to shed a few permanent kilograms whcih suddenly put him into the climbers category.

 

Without that he would never have been able to win or even be in contention in terms of the mountain stages...... In the TDF 3 kg's makes one hell of a difference (over 3,500km's). (he even filed the paint of his one bike to save a few grams according to his one book)

 

So yes he was a superior athlete but he did have help (if you can call cancer that). Its like a fat person having that operation that they cut out half of your intestine and suddenly you lose 50kg's and do the comrades.

 

Not sure what the point is I am trying to make but just for interest sake......

[scotty]

Your office at Loftus???

You recognize it.

[Velouria]

Don't they first manufacture the dope, there after they need to develope tests to "find" the dope in your bloodstream? So you pass the test until the testers catch up to the dopers and then a new dope is invented again

Here is an interview with the guy that developed the EPO test and homologous blood transfusion test. He doesn't have an axe to grind about Lance, but he does make some good points about doping in general and the myth of Lance in particular:

 

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden

[Velouria]

Ok but lets look at it from a different angle. Had Lance never had cancer he would not have won even one Tour De France.

 

He said himself in his biographies he would forever have been a rider like cancellara or Jens Voight. Cancer helped him to shed a few permanent kilograms whcih suddenly put him into the climbers category.

 

Without that he would never have been able to win or even be in contention in terms of the mountain stages...... In the TDF 3 kg's makes one hell of a difference (over 3,500km's). (he even filed the paint of his one bike to save a few grams according to his one book)

 

So yes he was a superior athlete but he did have help (if you can call cancer that). Its like a fat person having that operation that they cut out half of your intestine and suddenly you lose 50kg's and do the comrades.

 

Not sure what the point is I am trying to make but just for interest sake......

 

Even that is part of the myth of Lance. Apart from losing a testicle, cancer didn't physiologically change him at all. He never fell into the category of weight weenie skinny sub-70kg climbers. His post-cancer racing weight ranges from 74kgs to 79kgs, and for a guy that is 5'5 or 5'6 tall, that's quite heavy...

['Dale]

The article is very interesting. The basic premise of the article is that LA has misrepresented the work which the livestrong foundation does, and that in effect the foundation is a slush fund for CANCER advocacy rather than a funding conduit for research. He some how tries to link this misrepresentation to a perceived or speculated dishonestly regarding LA's cycling career. He also speculates whether the foundation can survive withut LA and visa versa.

 

Obviously, all the incongruencies regarding the movement of funds etc mokes it sound like who is paying for the ANC 100 year bash or Boesak accountancy.

 

Just like the weirdo Bobby Fischer elevated chess in the USA in the 1970's despite being a slightly mad, LA has also increased the profile of cancer awareness and sport in the USA, despite being a most unlikeable person. The use desperately needs physical fitness and caner awareness, so no mater how evil Lance may be he in a twisted way is doing good. In the end he is doing more for the general health and fitness of the USA than say Eddy Merckx has done for health and fitness in Belgium, or Sir Hoy has done in the UK.

 

So it is easier to find fault with those that try than thos that do nothing.

Important point there in bold, Witkop.

 

The highest trees catches the most wind.

 

 

Lance is iconic to the sport and to cancer awareness with the Livestrong Foundation.

Unfortunately, I believe, like so many others, he was part of a cheating system (doping) that prevailed and continue to in the sport.

[Tumbleweed]

Even that is part of the myth of Lance. Apart from losing a testicle, cancer didn't physiologically change him at all. He never fell into the category of weight weenie skinny sub-70kg climbers. His post-cancer racing weight ranges from 74kgs to 79kgs, and for a guy that is 5'5 or 5'6 tall, that's quite heavy...

 

From From Lance to Landis: “God knows what happened during that winter, but Lance came back the spring of ’96 and he was frickin’ huge. He looked like a linebacker. It was ‘Holy sh*t, man, he is big.’ Obviously, we all noticed it and he knew we did. He said something about [Dr. Michele] Ferrari not realizing the effect the weight room was going to have . . . but with Lance it was more than just seeing him big. I mean, he was big, but he could now rip the cranks off the bike like never before.”