Lance Armstrong Banned and Stripped of TDF Titles

[Guest Omega Man]

Sure, it was mentioned a few times some pages back, I didn't mean to point the finger at you.

Sweet.

 

Through all of the slagging others off and fanboys and haters and all that there's a few thing's i'd really love to know about the whole thing.

 

1. Who ran paniagua? It seems not all of the riders were doping and that it was reserved for certain rockstars within the teams.

2. What was LA's natural hematocrit level? Just so we could understand how much of an advantage he gained from the use of EPO.

3. Just how big is/was it? There's no doubt in my mind that there was a huge conspiracy. I'd love to know who the main drivers were.

 

Finally. Logic tells me there's no way that LA was the main driver. People were using PEDS long before he arrived on the scene and they didn't stop when he retired. Making him the arch enemy is like blaming Secretariat for the prevalence of steroids in horse racing.

[Lucky Luke.]

Sweet.

 

Through all of the slagging others off and fanboys and haters and all that there's a few thing's i'd really love to know about the whole thing.

 

1. Who ran paniagua? It seems not all of the riders were doping and that it was reserved for certain rockstars within the teams.

I reckon there were very very few riders who did not dope at all on principle, or perhaps because of lack of funds or fears around their health.

 

The culture of the sport has been such that it legitimised, required and even respected doping.

 

When Graeme Obree joined a road team after breaking the hour record, one of the riders asked him what he did it on, and then called him an amateur for not doping. Obree left the team after less than an hour.

 

The Lausanne lab claims to have very accurate data on how many riders rode grand tours with some form of blood vector doping - bags, epo, haemoglobin or whatever.

 

Read about that here: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1076503#post1076503

 

The numbers vary in accordance with the risk/reward ratios. This is why I would argue it is not impossible to almost stamp out doping in cycling. All you have to do is dial up that risk/reward ratio.

 

2. What was LA's natural hematocrit level? Just so we could understand how much of an advantage he gained from the use of EPO.

 

Not sure, but also not convinced, given his privileged position and resources, that he stuck to the 50 limit. If so his starting point is less of an issue.

 

3. Just how big is/was it? There's no doubt in my mind that there was a huge conspiracy. I'd love to know who the main drivers were.

 

My opinion: Armstrong and JB. If I had to guess, the UCI, Pat, Hein, Martial Saugy played their part, but didn't drive it. The UCI, under Pat and Hein, have acted in an opportunistic role. Ignore the doping until it suits you, which gives you the power to control the riders and the teams. JB and Armstrong knew this, and upped the stakes by buying themselves a stake in this abuse of power.

 

Finally. Logic tells me there's no way that LA was the main driver. People were using PEDS long before he arrived on the scene and they didn't stop when he retired. Making him the arch enemy is like blaming Secretariat for the prevalence of steroids in horse racing.

 

For sure, the Armstrong story is just one particularly extreme case that illustrates how messed up things can get. To me his personality was more of a factor in all this than his athletic talents, impressive enough as they no doubt are.

 

In a way Armstrong's silence ensures the longevity of his story. There's an element of mystery around the guy for as long as he clams up about what really went on. No doubt he realises this on some level.

['Dale]

 

In a way Armstrong's silence ensures the longevity of his story. There's an element of mystery around the guy for as long as he clams up about what really went on. No doubt he realises this on some level.

 

True, there's a lot of power in silence.

He's using it well to manipulate the situation.

I hoping he will be subpoenaed to testify when Bruyneel goes to arbitration.

This will break the 'omerta' he is still maintaining...

[Wyatt Earp]

Goeie moer, are you okes still debating this issue.

[Lucky Luke.]

True, there's a lot of power in silence.

He's using it well to manipulate the situation.

I hoping he will be subpoenaed to testify when Bruyneel goes to arbitration.

This will break the 'omerta' he is still maintaining...

 

Yep, unless Bruyneel is holding out for a pay-off. Hard to imagine him going into court and spilling his guts... we can only hope

[Lucky Luke.]

Goeie moer, are you okes still debating this issue.

 

work o' clock

[eddy]

3. Just how big is/was it? There's no doubt in my mind that there was a huge conspiracy. I'd love to know who the main drivers were.

 

Finally. Logic tells me there's no way that LA was the main driver. . Making him the arch enemy is like blaming Secretariat for the prevalence of steroids in horse racing.

 

One name that hasn't come up is that of Thom Weisel, the guy who put together Tailwind Sports and was the original team owner of what became US Postal.

 

He was also the Investment banker who also "rescued" USA Cycling from bankruptcy in 2000 and placed his business partner Jim Ochowicz in as president.

 

So now he owned the team and the regulating authority and when LA complained about the lack of "support" he was getting from DS Eddie Borysewicz, (IIRC) had him fired and replaced by Johan Bruyneel.

 

The stage was set.........

Edited November 14, 2012 by eddy

[eddy]

Goeie moer, are you okes still debating this issue.

 

Ja, daar is F@k@l om te se oor die rugby en die krieket is ook maar K@K....

[Guest Omega Man]

Ja, daar is F@k@l om te se oor die rugby en die krieket is ook maar K@K....

LOL. That actually made be spill my lunch beer

[Lucky Luke.]

One name that hasn't come up is that of Thom Weisel, the guy who put together Tailwind Sports and was the original team owner of what became US Postal.

 

He was also the Investment banker who also "rescued" USA Cycling from bankruptcy in 2000 and placed his business partner Jim Ochowicz in as president.

 

So now he owned the team and the regulating authority and when LA complained about the lack of "support" he was getting from DS Eddie Borysewicz, had him fired and replaced by Johan Bruyneel.

 

The stage was set.........

 

Good point Eddy, I thought of mentioning him but most don't know much about him. There are many excellent questions around Weisel's involvement. His history with EPO goes back to day dot. Weisel's Montgomery Securities financed Amgen's early EPO research, the successful sales of which led to their later IPO.

 

Weisel’s formal involvement with cycling began with Montgomery Securities’ sponsorship of Eddie Borysewicz and his cycling team, called Montgomery-Subaru, in 1989. In its second year of operation, the team welcomed one Lance Armstrong into its ranks.

 

http://www.cyclismas.com/2011/11/the-trifecta-that-shaped-u-s-cycling-in-the-armstrong-era/

[dracs]

Call me what you like but when you have immunity from positive tests this seems to me like it would affect the profile of this 'playing field' others keep bringing up.

 

For me when there's organised big budget doping there is no playing field. Seems obvious really but there you go.

 

As for mentions of 'strategy' earlier, I have to call BS on this too. Postal went from grade A losers at the Tour to the strongest team in one year. The strategy only changed when they had the firepower to back it up. Easy to say 'guys, lets smash it at the front all day and the climbers can sprint up Alpe d'Huez' when you have the legs to do it.

All I will call you is consistent

 

I don't think I said anything about their strategy at all never mind that it alone lead to him winning, but we presumably can all agree that Armstrong and US Postal were single minded in their approach and I believe doping was one element of the entire program to achieve their objectives. I think its is disingenuous to suggest everything was about the doping - and it is naive to think many of the other top teams didn't have the same resources or access to experts and drugs as USP had, or that they doped any less.

[fastbike]

This is like the Cape Epic route. Just going around in circles all week.

[Guest Omega Man]

This is like the Cape Epic route. Just going around in circles all week.

Hahahaha. There goes my beer again.

['Dale]

Open letter from UCI's Postman Pat...

 

Dear rider,

I would like to take this opportunity to update you on the latest developments and decisions we have taken in response to the current crisis in our sport.

You will have seen in recent media reports that Philippe Gilbert, Mark Cavendish and Bradley Wiggins among many others have been strong voices in telling the world that today’s cycling is cleaner than ever before. Of course, they are right. You, today’s riders, not only participate in the most innovative and effective anti-doping programs in sport but above all you have understood which choice to make for your career and for your sport. The result is that our sport is cleaner...

 

READ MORE HERE

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/11/news/an-open-letter-from-pat-mcquaid-to-the-riders-on-the-postal-service-scandal_265021

[Velouria]

 

2. What was LA's natural hematocrit level? Just so we could understand how much of an advantage he gained from the use of EPO.

 

Internet consensus suggests that it is between 38% and 41% (I couldn't find anything definitive though).

Have a look at his blood values for his comeback, as well as the explanation here. How accurate these values are is also open to debate - perhaps these are post emergency saline transfusion values.

 

http://cdn-community2.livestrong.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/9/10/c981f7be-e46c-4245-aa9d-d61ae110a264.Full.jpg

[Lucky Luke.]

Livestrong are running scared now - chairmanship, board membership and now the name as well

 

 

Livestrong cancer charity drops Lance Armstrong name from title

 

 

http://thestar.com.m...RONG&sec=sports

Edited November 15, 2012 by Lucky Luke.