Lance Armstrong

London Headshots said:
OK, so from what you're saying, nobody is on drugs, because the tests are perfect.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that at all. All I'm saying is that riders don't know when they are being tested (apart from the hour of the day).

Dopers tend to be ahead of the testers, with techniques to conceal doping and new substances. People do get caught though, although cycling is a lot cleaner these days than it used to be.
 
redddraggon said:
I'm not saying that at all. All I'm saying is that riders don't know when they are being tested (apart from the hour of the day).

Dopers tend to be ahead of the testers, with techniques to conceal doping and new substances. People do get caught though, although cycling is a lot cleaner these days than it used to be.
Click to expand...

But you are saying exactly that it seems. You say the half-life of most substances is longer than 24 hours, which makes it harder to evade. The only conclusion from that I can draw is you're saying they don't use anything.

Or are you agreeing with me and saying that they're using peptides that can't currently be tested?
 
London Headshots said:
But you are saying exactly that it seems. You say the half-life of most substances is longer than 24 hours, which makes it harder to evade. The only conclusion from that I can draw is you're saying they don't use anything.

Or are you agreeing with me and saying that they're using peptides that can't currently be tested?
Click to expand...

I'm saying that knowing what hour of the day that they might get tested doesn't help, they don't know what day they are going to tested which is the important thing.
 
redddraggon said:
I'm saying that knowing what hour of the day that they might get tested doesn't help, they don't know what day they are going to tested which is the important thing.
Click to expand...

So how come it helps the people I know who beat the tests every time? How come there are so many opponents of randomised testing saying it's fallible?

If you miss a drugs test, you get a fine. If you miss three you get a ban. Hundreds of British athletes have a missed test on their record.



If you want a famous case, then check out Rio Ferdinand. I'm not saying he's using (I've said before, professional football is the only sport in which I haven't even heard a rumour of users), but he did exactly what the people I'm talking about do in order to detox.
 
Last edited:
How about innocent until proven guilty?

In every sport, throughout history, there is usually a standout athlete of a generation. Someone that can do things that nobody else can do. Someone that moves the goalposts, raises the standard and appears to change the direction that the sport is taking.

How about people just accept that Lance was one of these athletes. I have read through the majority of the posts on this thread and numerous times there are comments thay maybe the UCI is corrupt and covering things up.

When someone is successful there is bound to be jealousy. People who what to take that person of their perch. Could the other drug abusers been using to merely try and keep up with Lance? Could someone be bribed now to try and 'prove' that Lance was using then?

It's sad that instead of acknowledging that someone has passed all of the tests asked of them that the rumours continue.

Is anyone questioning Chris Hoy? Usain Bolt? Thorpe the swimmer?

Lets appreciate that sometimes there are people that are able to achieve things that most others can only dream of.
 
Dude, I totally get what you're saying, and I'm not trying to refute it, it's just my opinion that Lance is not clean. I personally do not believe that it in any way diminishes his achievements.

I do most definitely appreciate that he is achieving something 99% of people can only dream of. I don't see what that has to do with steroid use, though.
 
MG TF 135 said:
How about innocent until proven guilty?

In every sport, throughout history, there is usually a standout athlete of a generation. Someone that can do things that nobody else can do. Someone that moves the goalposts, raises the standard and appears to change the direction that the sport is taking.

How about people just accept that Lance was one of these athletes. I have read through the majority of the posts on this thread and numerous times there are comments thay maybe the UCI is corrupt and covering things up.

When someone is successful there is bound to be jealousy. People who what to take that person of their perch. Could the other drug abusers been using to merely try and keep up with Lance? Could someone be bribed now to try and 'prove' that Lance was using then?

It's sad that instead of acknowledging that someone has passed all of the tests asked of them that the rumours continue.

Is anyone questioning Chris Hoy? Usain Bolt? Thorpe the swimmer?

Lets appreciate that sometimes there are people that are able to achieve things that most others can only dream of.
Click to expand...

Well said, Martyn
 
I think the most sensible post in this thread is Martyn's. Lance is innocent until proven guilty. He is probably one of the most tested cyclists ever, and clean every time. Must have done hundreds if not thousands of drug tests and not a squint of a hint.

Now London Headshots is entitled to his/her opinion (sorry no name to call you by) but the argument that everyone else is so he must be or "98% of top athletes take drugs", so therefore the other 2% must do.. is puerile.

Obviously you know a lot about the processes involved in drug testing and yes many are flawed, and false positives can happen... though if it's say 20% at any given opportunity, then 20% to the power of no of drug tests Lance has undertaken is miniscule.
 
You can be guilty even though you have not been found out though Lynton.....

As a fan of most sports especially at the top level (played a bit of good stuff myself) very few athletes are 'clean'. They all have some sort of dietary supplement that many would call drug use.
 
Lynton said:
I think the most sensible post in this thread is Martyn's. Lance is innocent until proven guilty. He is probably one of the most tested cyclists ever, and clean every time. Must have done hundreds if not thousands of drug tests and not a squint of a hint.

Now London Headshots is entitled to his/her opinion (sorry no name to call you by) but the argument that everyone else is so he must be or "98% of top athletes take drugs", so therefore the other 2% must do.. is puerile.

Obviously you know a lot about the processes involved in drug testing and yes many are flawed, and false positives can happen... though if it's say 20% at any given opportunity, then 20% to the power of no of drug tests Lance has undertaken is miniscule.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, I should have included this in my post but I got caught up in what it would mean IF he was found to have doped.
 
tiler65 said:
You can be guilty even though you have not been found out though Lynton.....
Click to expand...

Indeed that applies to almost everything...

Such as CRB checks.. have often said, than means "not been caught"...


(but this digresses)
 
I too have been involved in drug testing, standing by the door while someone pees into a bottle. Just to make it rather difficult to submit someone else's urine for testing.
 
Lynton said:
Now London Headshots is entitled to his/her opinion (sorry no name to call you by) but the argument that everyone else is so he must be or "98% of top athletes take drugs", so therefore the other 2% must do.. is puerile.
Click to expand...

It's puerile to assume that because 98% do something, that it might be common enough to assume the other 2% do it as well?

So if someone flips 98 heads, you'd call them "childish" for assuming that the next two flips would also be heads?

Besides, that's not my reasoning. I don't even the number of people in the top level of sport not doping is 2%. I think it's 0%. I just said 98% because it can't be conclusive proved. I just maintain that I'm open to the idea that someone might not be using gear.

Of course, the people not juicing are idiots. I don't consider Lance an idiot.
 
Last edited:
tiler65 said:
You can be guilty even though you have not been found out though Lynton.
Click to expand...

Using that logic i worry for the justice system. What hope has anyone of defending their name when many people already have them hung, drawn and quartered.
 
London Headshots said:
It's puerile to assume that because 98% do something, that it might be common enough to assume the other 2% do it as well?

So if someone flips 98 heads, you'd call them "childish" for assuming that the next two flips would also be heads?

Besides, that's not my reasoning. I don't even the number of people in the top level of sport not doping is 2%. I think it's 0%. I just said 98% because it can't be conclusive proved. I just maintain that I'm open to the idea that someone might not be using gear.

Of course, the people not juicing are idiots. I don't consider Lance an idiot.
Click to expand...


I think you have forgotten to put some thought into that.... :lol::lol:;)

oh and... 98 heads on the trot does not mean 99 will be heads... on the flip of a coin its 50:50.... though i fail to see the relevance of a game of chance to alleged "scientific" drugs testing... :shrug: the chances of 98 heads on a trot though are 0.5^98 so pretty much 0% (give or take a wee bit!) -- though I am not seeing where that argument is going.... :shake:


So from what you are suggesting, pretty everyone near or at the top of their sporting career is a doper... this of course will cover everything from golf through basketball, hockey, motor racing , cricket and rugby.. and many other sports... :cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo:
 
ill post in :thumbs:(:nuts: a way you ...understand :love:

there :help: is drug abuse :dummy: at the :bat::bat: top of every sport :((:.... maybe.... you.... ..... .... :thumbs: should read...up about the diuretics scandals in :clap: cricket or :bat:..... beta-blockers in golf..,....:thumbs: ....or...better yet ... you could just ignore what i say and throw vague jibes and insults...at...me..as if im a complete... moron...........................................hurrrr


Yes, I am suggesting that pretty much everyone at the top of sports uses one banned substance or another.
 
Last edited:
London Headshots said:
ill post in :thumbs:(:nuts: a way you ...understand :love:

there :help: is drug abuse :dummy: at the :bat::bat: top of every sport :((:.... maybe.... you.... ..... .... :thumbs: should read...up about the diuretics scandals in :clap: cricket or :bat:..... beta-blockers in golf..,....:thumbs: ....or...better yet ... you could just ignore what i say and throw vague jibes and insults...at...me..as if im a complete... moron...........................................hurrrr


Yes, I am suggesting that pretty much everyone at the top of sports uses one banned substance or another.
Click to expand...

posiview said:
They're watching...linky

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Indeed
 
I agree with London Headshots that most top athletes use some form of drug.
 
Quotes from Lance'a twitter:

Dear @usantidoping - we have now sent you THREE letters requesting all the relevant info in order for me to respond to your "review board".

Until now there has been no response, not even an acknowledgement of receipt. The knife cuts both ways - it's time to play by the rules.
 
TriggerHappy said:
Quotes from Lance'a twitter:

Dear @usantidoping - we have now sent you THREE letters requesting all the relevant info in order for me to respond to your "review board".

Until now there has been no response, not even an acknowledgement of receipt. The knife cuts both ways - it's time to play by the rules.
Click to expand...

Good for him. Innocent till proven guilty :thumbs:
 
Lynton said:
Indeed that applies to almost everything...

Such as CRB checks.. have often said, than means "not been caught"...


(but this digresses)
Click to expand...

So why say innocent until proven guilty....it just doesn't make sense.

Barry George was convicted of killing Jill Dando, how many thought he was innocent?

O.J. Simpson?

Sometimes you just can't prove stuff.
 
nilagin said:
If that is the case, why bother having testing? Just make it legal.:shrug:
Click to expand...


And what about the teenagers who are trying to make it to the pro ranks, they would have to start doping just to make the grade.

Just food for thought, in 1997 Pantani was on the juice and posted the fastest time up Alp D'Huez....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpe_d'Huez#Fastest_Alpe_d.27Huez_ascents

No way to you get that close the the most talented and doped climber of a generation without assistance, I believe there is natural talent, but not to that extent.

One of the reason Evans has started winning, and not off the back of the lead group is that there is now a level playing field, he is mostly (apart from Albert) competing against clean riders.
 
Edtog said:
And what about the teenagers who are trying to make it to the pro ranks, they would have to start doping just to make the grade.

Just food for thought, in 1997 Pantani was on the juice and posted the fastest time up Alp D'Huez....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpe_d%27Huez#Fastest_Alpe_d.27Huez_ascents

No way to you get that close the the most talented and doped climber of a generation without assistance, I believe there is natural talent, but not to that extent.

One of the reason Evans has started winning, and not off the back of the lead group is that there is now a level playing field, he is mostly (apart from Albert) competing against clean riders.
Click to expand...

Matt Rendell's "The Death of Marco Pantani" is a great read. And as someone in the know, you know Contador gained no advantage from what he was sanctioned for.
 
Let's hope the charges stick and people wake up to the whole LA brand con.

He was right about one thing.."It's not about the bike"
 
Last edited:
So, it looks like it's all come to a head. USADA say he'll be stripped of his TdeF titles. Some say they don't have the authority to do that.
 
I wonder what my mate is going to do about his 7 TDF Lance Armstrong tribute tattoo on his back?

In all seriousness everyone has their own opinion as to whether he cheated or not. I just can't be bothered with it now, it's dragged on so long.
 
topazed said:
In all seriousness everyone has their own opinion as to whether he cheated or not. I just can't be bothered with it now, it's dragged on so long.
Click to expand...

This is what Lance is using as his defence......doesn't seem right to me.
 
tiler65 said:
This is what Lance is using as his defence......doesn't seem right to me.
Click to expand...

He's not offering a defence.

USADA have the backing of proven liars and cheats like Hamilton, Andreu and Landis. These guys have stated that Armstrong doped along with them. Yet how come they failed tests and Armstong didn't? It does smell of a witch hunt to me.
 
If Lance is stripped of his 7 titles, which some are saying USADA have no jurisdiction to do so, who's to say that the runners-up of those years were not artificially enhancing their performance?

Their drug tests might be clear, but then again so were LA's.
 
This is one of the saddest days in sport ever IMO. Regardless of whether he doped or not. He was an idol for many young cyclists (me included), many other sports people and also thousands of cancer sufferers. The part I don't understand is how does USADA have the power to strip him of his TdF titles when the UCI/WADA decided not to proceed with the whole thing? The only evidence they have (after him being tested around 600 times in his career) is the testimonies of a few proven cheats and apparently some current pros (who strangely are still allowed to compete despite admitting doping?!?).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top