PDA

View Full Version : Latest L. Armstrong controversy



aquageek
August 24th, 2005, 08:55 AM
What is everyone's take on the latest allegations against Armstrong?

OK, I know, not swimming related, sorry.

Leonard Jansen
August 24th, 2005, 09:29 AM
Innocent until PROVEN guilty through the appropriate channels. Although in my gut, I do get this queasy feeling...

It does make you admire Paula Radcliffe all the more, however. (For you non-track & field people, she is the women's world record holder in the marathon.) She is paying to have her official urine samples stored so that if, in the future, there are allegations about her past use of a drug that would only become detectable at that time, the samples could be retested to assure that her performances were clean.

-LBJ

swimr4life
August 24th, 2005, 10:02 AM
I don't know anything about this. Please explain what's going on.

lefty
August 24th, 2005, 10:05 AM
Here is something to ponder: While it may or may not be true that Lance Armstrong used performance enhancing drugs, it is true that use of them is rampant in the sport. So in light of this, if you believe he is clean, Armstrong's accomplishments are even greater than first glance, because he was competeting on an uneven level.

Leonard Jansen
August 24th, 2005, 10:08 AM
Originally posted by swimr4life
I don't know anything about this. Please explain what's going on.

A summary:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050824/ap_on_sp_ot/cyc_armstrong_doping

-LBJ

craiglll@yahoo.com
August 24th, 2005, 10:22 AM
Lance Armstrong competed in one race this year.

Bicycling is one of the dirtiest sports in the world. Many cicyclists have tested positive for all types of enhancers. What I don't understand is the sample was supposedly given annonymously. does any one know how annonymous samples are kept and how could anyone prove that it is Lance's? That's the part that seems really weird to me.

Leonard Jansen
August 24th, 2005, 10:29 AM
Originally posted by craiglll@yahoo.com
does any one know how annonymous samples are kept and how could anyone prove that it is Lance's? That's the part that seems really weird to me.

The sample is taken, sealed and given a unique identifying number that correlates to the person. Only the testing group has both the number and the person's name. It is sent to the lab for testing with only the number attached, so the lab has no idea who it is. When it is tested, the results are sent back, along with the ID #, to the testing group.

-LBJ

craiglll@yahoo.com
August 24th, 2005, 10:38 AM
I just read the article. It sounds very right to use samples taken before their was a test to find EPO. Those samples would be more likely to come from people who thought they could get away with something. I still though wonder if many peole take a supplement and don't know exactly what is in it or what the ingredients will become once introduced to the body. I've looked at many steroid studies. Oddly there are few that actually test for effects of the drug. Many are to discover ways to detect the illiegal drugs.

TheGoodSmith
August 24th, 2005, 10:51 AM
CraigIII is "dead on". Cycling is a joke in terms of the number of drugs and cheaters.

Sounds like Lance has his hands full explaining this one.


John Smith

craiglll@yahoo.com
August 24th, 2005, 10:55 AM
I just finished an article that said the lab was not able to say if the samples were Lance's or not. Taht to me sounds good because they can't say that they did anything special to the samples. From what I think, the annymous factor means that the lab had to have no idea from whom the samples were taken. the article said that the lad tested six samples that were later identified later to be from Lance. It found nine different competitors had illegal drugs or enhancers in their samples.

L'Equipe has had it out for Lance for many years. The article tried to make it sound that the French were being unAmerican but they all loved Greg Lemond.

aquageek
August 24th, 2005, 11:02 AM
I have read these were also B samples as the A ones were destroyed or missing. So, apparently, even if true, LA could not be sanctioned.

SwiminONandON
August 24th, 2005, 11:07 AM
Who's one of Lance's biggest sponsors? A drug company ... he's taking all sorts of currently legal substances ... that being said he's still an amazing athlete, and is known for training his arse off ... not to mention all this crap dates back to 99 which at this point seems irrelevant

TheGoodSmith
August 24th, 2005, 11:15 AM
The issue isn't whether Lance is very talented and works hard. Thats a given and many other athletes in his sport are also very talented and work hard.

The issue is the edge over his competition. Is it drug related?


John Smith

lefty
August 24th, 2005, 11:40 AM
In my book, the issue is not edge over competition. The issue is wsa he on par with competition (by using) or below (by not using).

Jani Sutherland
August 24th, 2005, 11:45 AM
For more information go to velonews.com and click on the story under the picture.

Blue Horn
August 24th, 2005, 12:02 PM
I think the French hate the fact than an American has dominated their sport for the past 7 years.

Hook'em
Blue

aquageek
August 24th, 2005, 12:05 PM
Heck, the last Frog to win the Tour was PePe LePew.

mattson
August 24th, 2005, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by craiglll@yahoo.com
L'Equipe has had it out for Lance for many years.

That is the part that bugs me. If LA proves innocent of these charges, and passes drug tests from now to kingdom come, how much do you want to bet that L'Equipe will continue to sling drug rumors (because no one can be that good...).

TheGoodSmith
August 24th, 2005, 12:19 PM
Passing a drug test is no indication that the athlete is not cheating. It just means our drug testing trails the technology of the developer.

Remember what Victor Conte said..... its easy to cheat and get away with it.


John Smith

aquageek
August 24th, 2005, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by TheGoodSmith
It just means our drug testing trails the technology of the developer.

Alternatively, it could always mean the person isn't cheating.

TheGoodSmith
August 24th, 2005, 12:33 PM
Aquageek..... you are correct.

Essentially, testing is not telling us what we need to know.


John Smith

Fishgrrl
August 24th, 2005, 12:38 PM
Why oh why do people keep insisting that he's doping?? Why can't they leave him alone and just accept the fact that he works his ass off??

Damage Inc
August 24th, 2005, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by TheGoodSmith
CraigIII is "dead on". Cycling is a joke in terms of the number of drugs and cheaters.

The world of cycling finds and severly punishes its athletes who take banned substances only because they actually have a strict policy to do so.
Does Swimming? I honestly don't know swimmings policy.
Before you go and pass judgement on the sport of cycling, ask yourself how our champions have done so well. Evans, Thompson, Hackett, Thorpe and even Phelps, what is the status of these great athletes? Have they been tested as frequently as cycling stars? Could they achieve such domination and longevity like LA without enhancement?

Frank Thompson
August 24th, 2005, 12:48 PM
I will add to this what Dick Pound of the WADA said after the World Swimming Championships in Montreal after no one tested positive for banned substances. "If you haven't tested positive, that only means you haven't tested positive. It would also be naive to think everyone is clean."

Also Mustapha Larfaoui of FINA says "We are in a struggle that's impossible to win. Were going to win some struggles but were not going to win the war. Can we ensure total cleanliness? No, I cannot committ to that."

I was just over at the FINA site trying to find out information on membership. The site is under construction so I could not get information about dual masters memberships. I e-mailed them and they told me they are doing major revisions on doping procedures and testing and until that gets finished the site is under construction. I wonder what the new doping news is.

TheGoodSmith
August 24th, 2005, 12:49 PM
Who said we are passing judgement on just cylists.

Michelle Smith is an embarassment to our own sport.

The Italian Massimiliano Rosolino tested positive for Human Growth Hormone !

There was a sprinter in the US that got nabbed earlier this year.

Cheating is cheating. The thread began about Lance.... that's why we are talking about cyclists. Swiming is worse than it was 15 years ago.... but dont' kid yourself.....it's nothing like cyling.


John Smith

knelson
August 24th, 2005, 12:54 PM
Did anyone else read the story Outside magazine did on drug testing a month or two back? Pretty interesting. The main subject was a guy who runs the drug testing lab at UCLA. It's his opinion that the testing will never be effective because it's so easy to alter the drugs to make them undetectable. If WADA finds out about a new drug then new tests needs to be developed and that gives all the cheats plenty of time to move on to another drug. His idea was to eliminate the current system altogether and instead institute a volunteer system where the athletes more or less take a pledge to be clean. Doctors will then monitor some key attributes and if something falls outside the established parameters they consult the athlete. His take is that athletes will be compelled to join up or else face suspicion of being dirty.

EDIT: just found a link to the story if anyone is interested in reading it: http://outside.away.com/outside/features/200507/drugs-in-sports-1.html

hmlee
August 24th, 2005, 01:08 PM
It seems like every year Lance has been accused of doping in some way. I highly doubt it's anything more than jealous mudslinging. Even if he was doping - it's not like doping guarantees that you'll win something like the Tour, especially in a sport where other people are doping as well!

ande
August 24th, 2005, 02:04 PM
The goodsmith and I swam with Lance's sports agent / manager Bill Stapleton.
www.planetcse.com

I've never seen any without a doubt proof to support these allegations

Anytime anyone becomes the best in the sports world at anything, they become a target.

ande

69gscal
August 24th, 2005, 04:24 PM
The paper that reported on Lance's 99 results also stated," Never has a champion's retirment ever been so welcome" after this years Tour.
I'm sorry, but I just find it very, very odd how this paper has basically been running around behing Lance accumssing him of doping for the past few years.
Never have they had any proof.
If this drug that Lance supposedly had in his urine sample from 99 has been detectable for the past 4 years why are they only now testing these samples?
I would think they'd have done it. . . oh I don't know. . . .2001!
This whole stopry sounds very suspicious to me.

gull
August 24th, 2005, 04:27 PM
The timing of the story--just after winning his seventh Tour--is purely coincidental.

Karen Duggan
August 25th, 2005, 01:34 AM
I think this story is a bunch of Frog poop! Probably started by a Frog journalist who was spurned by Cheryl Crow because he couldn't get an interview or something!

The fact that they mentioned that it could NOT be proven tells me that they are TRYING to be extremely controversial and get some people to think twice about Lance's accomplishments. The sample in question dates back to 1999! Come on, can't they come up with something in the 21st century anyway?

OK so he won 6 in a row- do they want to antagonize him back into the Tour again so he'll win 7 (in their eyes) 8 for the rest of the world?

The man is one of the smallest exceptions in the world in terms of everything (physical abilities, work ethic, etc) give credit where credit is due. I admire his athletic abilities.

That being said, if the Frogs want to throw pond scum, please go after his personal life. While Crow seems perfectly charming, I still think his wife was screwed--- he's a jerk in my eyes, breaking up a home with three young children. What's that worth?

Redeep :p

swimr4life
August 25th, 2005, 06:56 AM
Originally posted by Karen Duggan
I think this story is a bunch of Frog poop! Probably started by a Frog journalist who was spurned by Cheryl Crow because he couldn't get an interview or something!

The fact that they mentioned that it could NOT be proven tells me that they are TRYING to be extremely controversial and get some people to think twice about Lance's accomplishments. The sample in question dates back to 1999! Come on, can't they come up with something in the 21st century anyway?

OK so he won 6 in a row- do they want to antagonize him back into the Tour again so he'll win 7 (in their eyes) 8 for the rest of the world?

The man is one of the smallest exceptions in the world in terms of everything (physical abilities, work ethic, etc) give credit where credit is due. I admire his athletic abilities.

That being said, if the Frogs want to throw pond scum, please go after his personal life. While Crow seems perfectly charming, I still think his wife was screwed--- he's a jerk in my eyes, breaking up a home with three young children. What's that worth?

Redeep :p


Karen,
Preach on sister! You took the words right out of my mouth. I am in complete agreement with you!
;)

geochuck
August 25th, 2005, 08:45 AM
I told you so. Rampant drug use.

craiglll@yahoo.com
August 25th, 2005, 11:02 AM
1) I can't really believe how racist so many of these responses are. The French are really not as anti-american as we think they are. Calling them "Frogs" is extremely negative. L'Equipe has always been very pro US cyclists. They wrote about the Tour of Georgia. something that very few US papers or magazines did. I don't even recall seeing an article about it in cicyclist oriented magazines. They also love Greg Lamond. I think people need to ask themselves if they are against the story because it may not be accruate or beause it involves the French.

2) The samples testesd were taken at the same time. I heard that they were freeze dried. The EPO detection test was not available at the time. It now is. many old samples have been retestdin many sports. The remarks given by many people who are in the testing industry are great. EPO thoughis an enhancer from old samples can be easily detected. We are probably losiing the war against dopping. After all we are losing the larger war against drugs.

3) Rosolini, along with many onthe Italian team have been supected of using somehting since before the Sydney . The US & Australian press beat the issue to death. We don't hear anyone saying itis US poop! The Australians go after Roso even though he has Australian connects. I'm sure that there are soem very promient US swimers who are very dirty. Even though the are tested.

mattson
August 25th, 2005, 11:17 AM
I've got to agree with Craig, one newspaper with a vendetta against LA is not the same as the whole country.

That'd be like saying all of the US has the same views as Pat Robertson (the knucklehead).

Blue Horn
August 25th, 2005, 12:36 PM
I haven't seen a single racist thread. The frogs are not a race. They are citizens of a certain slimmy country in Europe. Disliking France is not racist, Plus, it goes beyond the one paper, even the tour director is jumping on him. I am sorry, but this is all complete horse manure.

On a side note, I completely agree with Karen. He is a jerk for leaving his wife and three young children.

Hook'em
Blue

aquageek
August 25th, 2005, 12:48 PM
I completely resent being called a racist. French is not a race.

It would be ok to accuse me of frogism or being a frogist.

It's not like they are gonna stand up and fight about it.

MegSmath
August 25th, 2005, 12:55 PM
Originally posted by Blue Horn
On a side note, I completely agree with Karen. He is a jerk for leaving his wife and three young children.

Actually, it was his wife that left the marriage, and Sheryl Crowe did not come into the picture until after he was divorced.

swimr4life
August 25th, 2005, 01:04 PM
You know there are always 2 sides to the story. I thought I remember hearing that Lance was having an affair with Sheryl Crowe and that is why his wife divorced him. I guess we shouldn't jump to conclusions. If what you said is true, I apologize for judging him. If it isn't, I have lost a lot of respect for him. I guess only he and his wife know the true story.

As an athlete, I think he is one of the best that ever lived.

MegSmath
August 25th, 2005, 02:15 PM
See http://www.factmonster.com/spot/lancearmstrongtimeline.html for a timeline of Lance's life. It says he and Kristen divorced in 2003 and he began his relationship with Sheryl Crowe in 2004. I've read two of his books. The first one, "It's Not About the Bike," primarily tells the story of his battle with cancer, and it also talks about how he met Kristen when he first began his foundation. She helped him with publicity, they fell in love, and married. It is a common misconception that she nursed him through the cancer. They did not in fact meet until after he was cured. In the second book, "Every Second Counts," toward the end he says that his marriage is in trouble, but they're trying to work it out (this book was published in 2003, so it was probably written in 2002). He ascribes their problems to not talking enough, and him spending so much time training.

I am a big fan of Armstrong, one of the reasons being that he offers so much hope to cancer patients and survivors, and right now my cousin is battling leukemia. So I may not be very objective, and freely admit that I believe Armstrong about the drugs because I CHOOSE to believe him. I also think it's really unfair for him to take heat about his marriage and his celebrity girlfriend. He's not the first person to have a failed marriage, and he is entitled to a private life. People hear a rumor, take it as the gospel, and conclude he abandoned his wife and three children for a rock star. He's probably not a saint, but in this case people have not got their facts straight.

swimr4life
August 25th, 2005, 02:29 PM
Meg. I'm sorry if my post upset you. I am very proud of all that Lance Armstrong has endured and overcome in his life. I often use him as an example to my swimmers that you can overcome obstacles with determination, hard work and a postive attitude. I loved his first book and found his insights very inspirational.

I'm sorry about your cousin. I recently lost my cousin to cancer and know how heart wrenching that can be.

Like I said before, if I was misinformed, I'm sorry. Obviously I was. I'm glad I was wrong because I want to respect him again.

lefty
August 25th, 2005, 02:53 PM
Gull is right, we are losing the war on Performance Enhancing Drugs. Checking 6 year old samples may put a seed of doubt in today's cheaters - those taking undetectable drugs - because hopefully ONE DAY they will get caught. So I do not care if they are 20 year old samples, if we can now accurately test old samples, then we should. I would think twice about saying "those samples are 6 years old, who cares..."

RE: Lance's private life: Lance's own book is hardly an objective source. That said, who really knows what happened and as Meg pointed out he is entitled to his private life.

Matt S
August 25th, 2005, 06:21 PM
First, if these allegations are true, they are serious. Don't give me this, "it was soo long ago..." line. We are still cheesed off about Michelle Smith and the East Germans, so no double standards where foreigners we don't like are satan's span forevermore, but Americans we do like get a free pass based of the passage of time. Lance has made a BIG deal about how clean he is, and look at what an exemplary athlete, etc. etc. IF (I say again IF) it was all a big con job and he is simply the most effective doper, that would be a BIG story.

Second, prove it. My understanding, from an NPR piece I heard, is that there are samples from the 99 Tour. At that time there was no EPO test. Subsequently, a test has been developed. A lab that was one of the leaders in developing that test wanted to use some old samples to test, validate and refine their process. They got some samples from the 99 Tour. Some of those samples tested positive for EPO. The lab only knew them by ID numbers. L'Equipe claims to have documentary evidence showing some of the positive samples were from Lance. The Lab Director has stated that a false positive is very unlikely, and in fact that a false negative is more likely because EPO tends to degrade over time.

This is what we have so far. OK fellas. You made the claim. Let's pull all the relevant documents--the ones the magazine has and any others that may still exist. Let's retest any of the samples in question. If that is not necessary because this last test is reliable, let's here from the Lab about why that is so. If it is not possible because there is nothing left of the sample, let's have a full explanation of that. If Lance is truly innocent, he should be eager to sign any release necessary to allow review of any relevant documents. By the same token, if L'Equipe is willing to stand behind its story, it should be eager to have it verified any way possible.

This is a serious story, but I HATE unverifiable accusations. Prove it, or shut the flip up.

Matt

Karen Duggan
August 25th, 2005, 10:55 PM
Whoa, I'll bow out of this one. My "frog" comments were tongue in cheek. I have a lot of wonderful French friends that I met in college...

Lance's personal life- whatever the circumstance, "in my opinion" when there are children involved you do what you can and try to make it work- again "my opinion" I do not know Lance, so I should probably just keep my mouth shut- to me, it just looks bad.

Drugs- if you can't prove it at the time, don't bother, again, my opinion. We'd have to go back, then, through our entire sports history and strip numerous records and titles. I do not agree with drugs in sports, but until you are caught red-handed, leave it alone, what else can you do, speculate?

My apologies for offending anyone. See you on another thread :)

cinc3100
August 25th, 2005, 11:58 PM
I don't know if he is innocent or guilty. Many sports have that problem. Look at basebell.

jpjackson76
August 26th, 2005, 07:21 AM
Here are some things I look at when I here the rumors about Lance:

The French hate him, because he was very cocky early in his career, a Euro cycling no-no. Also because he is not French.

Lance was a world champion at 21 or could be 23.

A world class tri-athlete in his teens.

A genetic freak, he produces way less lactic acid than the average human.

Is tested more than any other cyclist at the tour.

Is innocent until proven guilty.

The USA is starting to produce outstanding cyclists, the US can win in cycling to not just the French. Hey Levi Liephiemer just won the Tour of Germany, start the witch hunt.

Michael Jordan was heads and shoulders above other NBA'ers for many years. It's not unreasonable for a cyclist to be the same for numerous years. Look @ Bernard Hinault, Migual Indurain, Eddy Mercks, all 5 time winners of the tour.

justforfun
August 26th, 2005, 10:18 AM
For more info, here's an interesting article about the testing done on the old samples:

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/8746.0.html

knelson
August 26th, 2005, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by Karen Duggan
Lance's personal life- whatever the circumstance, "in my opinion" when there are children involved you do what you can and try to make it work- again "my opinion" I do not know Lance, so I should probably just keep my mouth shut- to me, it just looks bad.

Maybe they did try to make it work. At the end of the day if you're miserable in a marriage you need to get out. Kids add a wrinkle, but from what I've read Lance is still an active father to them.

About the French being upset about a foreign rider winning the tour. They should be used to it by now. A Frenchman hasn't won since 1985!

aquageek
August 26th, 2005, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by knelson
Kids add a wrinkle

For just being wrinkles, they sure do demand a lot of time and attention. But, at the end of the day, it's really all about the parents, not the wrinkles.

Jani Sutherland
August 26th, 2005, 01:11 PM
I am a big fan of Lance Armstrong, dating back to before he even rode in the Tour de France. He trains harder than most and is genetically gifted. He has been tested more than most athletes but the tests cannot detect everything. EPO wasn't detectable in testing in 1999 so how do we know what is being used now and is not detectable. I am not saying Lance uses performance enhancing drugs. He says he is clean and a lot of people want to believe him. Many others in the sport with postive tests first stated they didn't use performance enhancing drugs and later admitted they did. No matter what, Lance trains harder than most, is an exceptional athlete and has done much for cancer awareness.

gull
August 26th, 2005, 01:16 PM
Originally posted by lefty
Gull is right, we are losing the war on Performance Enhancing Drugs.

Actually, Lefty, that was the other Craig's post, although I do agree with that statement.

I don't agree that our criticism of the French is "racist."

Swimmer Bill
August 26th, 2005, 01:20 PM
I wonder if EPO was administered as part of Armstrong's cancer treatment. EPO aids the production of red blood cells, which is why it is a common treatment for Anemia. A large percentage of patients with cancer have occurrences of Anemia.

~sb

swimr4life
August 26th, 2005, 01:28 PM
I thought about that too! When did he have cancer treatments?

MegSmath
August 26th, 2005, 01:33 PM
Bill, Lance did indeed receive EPO as part of his therapy. He credits it with helping to save his life. I had wondered whether he might have "leftover" EPO in his bloodstream in 1999, which was not so far away from his treatment. But surely if he wanted to use that for a justification he would have, plus I can't imagine a drug remaining for that long. I've read several articles today that mention he took EPO when he had cancer. I also read an interesting quote yesterday from Eddy Merkyxx (I'm sure I've butchered the spelling). He said Lance had told him he was clean and if it came down to believing Lance or some journalists, he was going to believe Lance. I am normally pretty cynical about the "I've never taken performance-enhancing drugs" line. I didn't believe Palmero, or Michelle Smith, or any of the others. But I want to believe Lance, so I'm going to!

craiglll@yahoo.com
August 26th, 2005, 03:54 PM
Originally posted by aquageek
I completely resent being called a racist. French is not a race.

It would be ok to accuse me of frogism or being a frogist.

It's not like they are gonna stand up and fight about it.
I think there are many names that you may be called.

Blue Horn
August 26th, 2005, 06:35 PM
Originally posted by aquageek
I completely resent being called a racist. French is not a race.

It would be ok to accuse me of frogism or being a frogist.

It's not like they are gonna stand up and fight about it.

Geek,

I haven't ever laughed that hard from reading an internet post. I love your dry sense of humor.

Craig,

Just curious, are you French?

Hook'em
Blue

craiglll@yahoo.com
August 26th, 2005, 07:26 PM
Originally posted by Blue Horn
Geek,

I haven't ever laughed that hard from reading an internet post. I love your dry sense of humor.

Craig,

Just curious, are you French?

Hook'em
Blue
Why would it matter?

Have you heard Pound's remarks today? He stated that the evidence is very credible. The lab that tested Lance is certified by the Olympic committee. I believe that we don't know the real truth yet because we are so lost in shock and denial that any of our heroes could possible do somehting so wrong. We really must wait until there is a yes or no. However, it really doesn't look very good for the results from a sample given six years ago.

We are very unwilling to listen to any story given by any other athelete, why should we be any more willing to believe Lance's stroy? I don't know him, I wonder if any on this thread do either. I have no reason to believe him or the press.

Also, one of my grandfathers came from France to the US when he was 3 years old. Of all the people I have ever known, he was probably the most patriotic person I've ever met. To him the uS could do no wrong. This contry was his savior.

geochuck
August 26th, 2005, 07:37 PM
Why are we concerned about what somone uses to do better than others more people use and lie. The true fact is the USA athletes have been using for years, Carl Lewis still has his gold that he got when Johnson was taken down, remember Flo Joe.

I am all for do it if you can get away with it and if you are from the USA you can get away with it or blame it on the French because they did not go to Iraq. Should the French or any one stand up for liers???.

mattson
August 26th, 2005, 09:20 PM
Originally posted by craiglll@yahoo.com
Have you heard Pound's remarks today? He stated that the evidence is very credible. The lab that tested Lance is certified by the Olympic committee.

I think a lot of that was covered by an earlier linked article...


Originally posted by justforfun
For more info, here's an interesting article about the testing done on the old samples:

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/8746.0.html

I'd be very interested in hearing all the details. So far, it seems like there has been some very questionable methodology. (Have they tested 6-year old urine samples, where they had known control and positive samples?)

TheGoodSmith
August 26th, 2005, 11:09 PM
Cycling is a VERY dirty sport comparatively. Talk to any elite level rider and they will tell you (after a few) just how dirty it is.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out or if it just dies a slow death.

It really is hard to tell as a neutral observer what is fact and fiction in the media. However, it does seem there is recurring "smoke" around Lance and the possible use of drugs..... where there's smoke..... is there fire?

Hope not.


John Smith

geochuck
August 27th, 2005, 11:30 AM
The cheaters in the old days just kicked the spokes out of the other riders bikes.

Frank Thompson
June 5th, 2006, 12:19 PM
Last Wednesday, I heard a press conference that said Lance Armstrong was cleared of EPO wrong doing back in 1999. Then this weekend, Dick Pound of the WADA rejected the independent investigation and says it "borders on farcicial".

Read Dick Pound's comments here: http://www.smh.com.au/news/sport/report-clearing-lance-armstrong-farcical/2006/06/03/1148956590634.html

Read the background of the story here:http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2005-08-25-armstrong-doping_x.htm

hofffam
June 5th, 2006, 01:06 PM
I think the test of old blood samples was flawed and not based on sound medical or ethical processes. The tests were done on only one set of samples ("A" or "B", I don't remember which), and a test against the other was not possible. At minimum there is a "reasonable doubt" on the integrity of the testing process. I also believe there was inherent bias in the process because the testers WANTED to find positives for Lance.

I won't say that I believe 100% that Lance has never used EPO. Of course I don't know anything. But Lance's association with Dr. Ferrari is mysterious enough to create some doubt. I also think a lot of people simply don't accept that Lance has been an exceptional athlete his entire life. His VO2 max is off the charts and he trains harder, has timed his training for peak performance at the TDF, and he uses technology (e.g. aerodynamics) better than anyone.

In any case EPO was not a banned substance at the time. And they didn't test the entire TDF set of blood samples. I think Lance's history of ZERO positive tests over his cycling history is a powerful statement.

Blue Horn
June 5th, 2006, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by Frank Thompson
Last Wednesday, I heard a press conference that said Lance Armstrong was cleared of EPO wrong doing back in 1999. Then this weekend, Dick Pound of the WADA rejected the independent investigation and says it "borders on farcicial".

Read Dick Pound's comments here: http://www.smh.com.au/news/sport/report-clearing-lance-armstrong-farcical/2006/06/03/1148956590634.html

Read the background of the story here:http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2005-08-25-armstrong-doping_x.htm

What would you expect from WADA/Dick Pound now that their butts are in the fire and someone is suggesting a tribunal be set up to look into the wrong doing in this situation?

gull
June 5th, 2006, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by hofffam
In any case EPO was not a banned substance at the time.

Actually it was banned, but there was not an approved test for it at the time.

hofffam
June 5th, 2006, 02:42 PM
gull80 - I stand corrected. In any case - the test of old blood samples was not done fairly and in the claimed spirit of academic research.

Why else was Lance the only named positive? L'equipe hates Lance and was only too happy to publish the leak. I bet the tests would have produced many positives with 198 cyclists.

geochuck
June 5th, 2006, 02:46 PM
Tested because he won, they don't test everyone usually the winner and then random testing. This is how they test horses that win races probably the same for other competitions.

dolphinboy
June 5th, 2006, 04:25 PM
All i can say

is lance armstrong is a hero to go through what he has done with his battle with cancer...I mean a less than 10% chance of living..the guy is a amazing.

It says alot for the people who are trying to drop him in the s**t trying to stitch up a guy that has been through more than most people in the world.

Inner strength is the key and a won battle against the deadliest cancer has got to be a huge boost for inner strength

I would bow to the bloke if necesary

hofffam
June 5th, 2006, 05:18 PM
All TDF cyclists are tested at least once just prior to the race start. I found the following at "dummies.com" in their section on TDF regulations:

Drug testing at every stage

Every rider in the Tour is tested for banned substances prior to the race. Various cyclists are tested after every stage, according to a selection process determined before the race. Under current rules, at least 180 urine drug tests are given, including daily drug tests for the race leader and stage winner and six to eight cyclists selected at random throughout the field.

It seems possible that someone might ride the TDF with no random tests if they are neither a stage winner or tour leader.

Lance of course has been the both the stage winner and race leader many times.

Matt S
June 8th, 2006, 07:22 PM
Thought others might be interested in this piece on how they test for HGH:

http://www.slate.com/id/2143301/

Matt

craiglll@yahoo.com
June 9th, 2006, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by hofffam
I think the test of old blood samples was flawed and not based on sound medical or ethical processes. The tests were done on only one set of samples ("A" or "B", I don't remember which), and a test against the other was not possible. At minimum there is a "reasonable doubt" on the integrity of the testing process. I also believe there was inherent bias in the process because the testers WANTED to find positives for Lance.

I won't say that I believe 100% that Lance has never used EPO. Of course I don't know anything. But Lance's association with Dr. Ferrari is mysterious enough to create some doubt. I also think a lot of people simply don't accept that Lance has been an exceptional athlete his entire life. His VO2 max is off the charts and he trains harder, has timed his training for peak performance at the TDF, and he uses technology (e.g. aerodynamics) better than anyone.

In any case EPO was not a banned substance at the time. And they didn't test the entire TDF set of blood samples. I think Lance's history of ZERO positive tests over his cycling history is a powerful statement.

I believe he has admitted to using EPO while he was taking therpy for his cancer. If I understand correctly, EPO can stay in the soft tissues for many years and testing isn't very accurate to determine when the drug was taken.

Also, I think inner strength is highly over-rated when it comes to cancer survival. I know much of it comes about from really following doctor's orders, doing what you are supposed to do, and taking care of yourselve before hand. I've known extremely strong people who have lost their battle. Some of us do and some of us don't. Physical condition prior to the onset is one huge factor indetermining outcome.

TheGoodSmith
June 9th, 2006, 05:37 PM
Hoffman,

Who cares anymore if athletes get tested a thousand times if the tests are not reliable, accurate enough or just missing drugs they don't know about yet.

THG is an example of this. Athletes using this enhancement were passing drug tests over and over until some one turned in a sample to the authorities.

Any more clearing a drug test doesn't mean you're clean. It merely means you've temporarily beat the test..... which as we have seen is at least 3-5 behind the abusers.


John Smith

Paul Smith
June 9th, 2006, 05:57 PM
Did Matt Shirley actually just write a post that had only 14 words in it? We may need to test him cause I'm sure he's on something!

hofffam
June 9th, 2006, 09:12 PM
Thegoodsmith - I suppose it will be a chase forever - the testers will try to stay ahead of the dedicated cheaters. But are you saying we shouldn't try at all since we can't catch them all?

In the case of TDF cyclists, EPO or other blood boosting substances are the ones of greatest interest because of its impact on endurance. Not sure if HGH is a big issue or not.

I think the odds of getting caught increase with the number of tests, especially random. Unless the athlete has a foolproof way to beat the test it seems to me they take great risks during a competition like the TDF. Lance especially knows he is going to get tested a lot.

Why don't they test Master's swimmers at nationals and the Worlds? Surely there are many Masters swimmers who would be greatly tempted to cheat their age with performance enhancing drugs. A fair number of Masters swimmers are physicians and could easily obtain some of these substances.

Frank Thompson
June 10th, 2006, 09:49 AM
Originally posted by hofffam
Why don't they test Master's swimmers at nationals and the Worlds? Surely there are many Masters swimmers who would be greatly tempted to cheat their age with performance enhancing drugs. A fair number of Masters swimmers are physicians and could easily obtain some of these substances.

Hofffam:

To avoid a trip down memory lane I have provided links of threads of these discussions.

http://forums.usms.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4278&highlight=drug+testing+masters

http://forums.usms.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5290&highlight=drug+testing+masters

http://forums.usms.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3207&highlight=drug+testing+masters

http://forums.usms.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1958&highlight=drug+testing+masters

http://forums.usms.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1482&highlight=drug+testing+masters

gull
June 10th, 2006, 05:36 PM
Originally posted by hofffam
A fair number of Masters swimmers are physicians and could easily obtain some of these substances.

Not exactly. Anabolic steroids are restricted drugs, and their use is regulated by the DEA. Any physician inappropriately prescribing these drugs can be prosecuted and lose his or her license to practice medicine. Administration of epo, hgh, etc. strictly for purposes of performance enhancement is unethical and would trigger an investigation by the state medical board (and subsequent loss of license). I'd venture to say that the vast majority of physicians would never consider doing something like this strictly on ethical grounds ("do no harm").

Matt S
June 10th, 2006, 06:40 PM
I'm more worried about excluding people who are on medication legitimately to treat illnesses health care professionals would agree are real. I agree with Gull (hold on to your hats; this doesn't happen often...) The potential consequences for docs are so significant, and the rewards for USMS, beyond personal satisfaction, are so slender, I can't see why we would want to do this.

End of rehash. Return to your normally scheduled programming.

hofffam
June 10th, 2006, 07:08 PM
gull80 - you're probably right. But the Masters athlete is probably capable of obtaining whatever he wants - if he/she wanted to.

I agree the vast majority have little reason to do so other than ego. I do wonder if so many people our age (I'm 47) are willing to have cosmetic surgery for vanity's sake that wouldn't they also do other things to swim faster/younger?

I think drug testing Masters athletes would be an interesting exercise. I bet they'd find lots of Lipitor, diuretics, ibuprofen, etc..

I have hypertension and take a calcium channel blocker and ACE inhibitor; I also take Lipitor.

Peter Cruise
June 10th, 2006, 07:33 PM
I must admit it...I do it...beer doping! The difference is that you take it after the event and it enhances your performance both in your memory and in your recounting of your exploits. Works for fishing too...

geochuck
June 10th, 2006, 07:36 PM
Who cares who is doping. Let them do what they want all I know is I am with Peter only IO prefer a beer before and after.

craiglll@yahoo.com
June 12th, 2006, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by Paul Smith
Did Matt Shirley actually just write a post that had only 14 words in it? We may need to test him cause I'm sure he's on something!

Matt went to a small Liberal Arts college in Illinis. I also went to one. We are taught to write. He & I should be in a contest to see who has the longest post on this discussion htread.

craiglll@yahoo.com
June 12th, 2006, 03:23 PM
Originally posted by gull80
Not exactly. Anabolic steroids are restricted drugs, and their use is regulated by the DEA. Any physician inappropriately prescribing these drugs can be prosecuted and lose his or her license to practice medicine. Administration of epo, hgh, etc. strictly for purposes of performance enhancement is unethical and would trigger an investigation by the state medical board (and subsequent loss of license). I'd venture to say that the vast majority of physicians would never consider doing something like this strictly on ethical grounds ("do no harm").

In western Illinois and eastern Iowa, there are stores called Farm King. In each store there are very large cases that hold animal drugs. Antibiotics, steroids all sorts of things. They are relatively easy to get.

The stores also sell farm & animal equipment. Once in college, my friend, his girlfriend (who I went to high school with), and I were shopping at one of the Farm Kings. In one section,they have horse whips, buggy supplies and harnesses. Pete & I put on harnesses while Anita acted as if she were whipping us to get us to push her in the shopping cart. We were having a great time. We were taken to the door by the store manager and told to never return to the store. many years later, I was raising money for a museum in Galesburg. The owner of the stores gave a very large donation. I wanted so badly to tell him of my past adventure in his wonderful store.

My point though is thta steroids are very easy to get. I would guess that in any gym right now there are at least 3 people juiced.

knelson
June 12th, 2006, 03:55 PM
Originally posted by craiglll@yahoo.com
Antibiotics, steroids all sorts of things. They are relatively easy to get.

But are they anabolic steroids? If not this fact is probably completely irrelevent.

Frank Thompson
July 27th, 2006, 04:14 PM
Has anyone heard about the Floyd Landis controversey. First Lance, now Floyd.

http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/5822020?FSO1&ATT=HCP&GT1=8393

Rich Abrahams
July 27th, 2006, 05:29 PM
Frank,

Thanks for the link to the story. I followed the Tour very closely and was inspired by Landis's performance. This news is extremely upsetting to me if true. It makes one very cynical.

jim clemmons
July 27th, 2006, 05:46 PM
You would think that with the high visibility and all of recent weeks and past years events you'd just about have to be a moron to think you could somehow, someway squeak by undetected, wouldn't you?

I mean c'mon! You'd have to know you are going to be tested and detected especially if you win a stage or the event outright. Even coming in the top twenty or something probably runs significant risk of having to step into the trailer or whatever to produce a sample.

Hopefully the second vial is clean.

We'll see.

Matt S
July 27th, 2006, 07:00 PM
I am also puzzled by the reports and would like to hear more details before I know what I'm thinking.

The part that caught my attention is that his steroid level tested high, considered beyond the norm for naturally occuring hormones, after Stage 17. Huh? Only Stage 17? That does not sound consistent with my understanding of how steroids are used to cheat effectively. If you are going to get the benefit of steroids, you use them while you are training for competition, and taper off (so you don't get caught) as the race approaches. You clearly get no benefit by staying off them, and then suddenly downing a whole bunch right in the middle of a competition.

If my understanding is correct (medical types, please feel free to chime in), why in the world would he pop, but only in one test in the middle of the race? If he was on them, he ought to be showing steroid levels that are roughly consistent at every test over the course of the race. If we have one result that substantially differs from all his other drug tests, in a substance that confers no significant benefit if taken once on the day of the competition, I have to wonder about the validity of the test.

So, I'm holding my judgment. However, if on the heels of cycling's well established history of drug cheating, if on the heels of large chunks of the pre-race favorites getting tossed out of the race because of credible evidence they were drug cheats, we now have verified info the winner of this year's tour was a drug cheat, I have a very hard time taking professional cycling seriously as a sport I'd care to follow.

Matt

knelson
July 27th, 2006, 07:15 PM
Matt, I think what you are missing is he tested positive for testosterone (or at least an illegal testerone to epitestosterone ratio), not steroids.

edit: ok, I'm dumb. Testosterone is a steroid, but I didn't think it was used in the same way other anabolic steroids are, but I'm probably wrong about this.

Allen Stark
July 27th, 2006, 07:52 PM
Kirk,yes it is. It is the original anabolic steroid. Since it is naturally occuring it can be harder to check as you can only go by quatitative analyses. Perhaps only one test was high because the others were borderline and this day he was a little more dehydrated and his blood and urine more concentrated.Or maybe it's lab error and he'll be exonerated.

Damage Inc
July 27th, 2006, 08:11 PM
Testosterone is used during the training phase of CHEATING to increase muscle mass and help with recovery over a long period of time. It is of almost no practical use during the race phase. What he needed to help with his recovery after bonking during the 16th(?) stage was a nice infusion of his own predonated blood. Human growth hormone maybe, but no way would a dose of testosterone help him to recover overnight. Thus this seems VERY fishy. He knows he will be tested and he was tested previously when he held the yellow jersey earlier in the race.
Conspiricy against the Americans?

Dobbie
July 28th, 2006, 06:39 AM
The amazing thing about the use of drugs in sport is the users are always ahead of the pack...perhaps Testosterone does have other effects.............


Erythropoiesis is the production of new red blood cells. This is accomplished primarily in the bone marrow, the red blood cell factory, so to speak. Erythropoiesis is stimulated primarily by erythropoietin (hence, the clever naming of that hormone!). Erythropoietin is produced in the kidneys. Androgens, including testosterone, are another type of hormone. One of the effects of androgens is to increase the production of erythropoietin. Another is to increase the responsiveness of immature bone marrow cells to the effects of erythropoietin. Simplistically, testosterone increases the output and effectiveness of erythropoietin, which in turn stimulates the production and regulation or red blood cells. Testosterone, and other androgens, has many other effects as well, which is why it is not used primarily for erythropoiesis.

Does anyone know if the affect above...unlike the anabolic effect...is more immediate???

craiglll@yahoo.com
July 28th, 2006, 09:05 AM
Originally posted by Allen Stark
Kirk,yes it is. It is the original anabolic steroid. Since it is naturally occuring it can be harder to check as you can only go by quatitative analyses. Perhaps only one test was high because the others were borderline and this day he was a little more dehydrated and his blood and urine more concentrated.Or maybe it's lab error and he'll be exonerated.

Excellent point. Dehydration can alter the results of the test. bikers don't usually drink enough. Many have very weird issues with their weight & self-body image. Some guys I've known I woud consider anarexic(sp). One thing about testosterone is that hard work will increase the amount produced by the body. I think it is one of the built-in survval mechanisms we humans have. I still, though, would wonder why his levels were high. Even if he were dehydrated the level woudl be ablut 3:1.

knelson
July 28th, 2006, 10:24 AM
I've heard a couple conflicting things now. On the one hand, I've heard that testosterone is used to aid recovery, on the other I've heard taking a single does of testosterone wouldn't help at all. So which is correct?

At this point I really don't know what to think. I know a couple things: one, Landis is still innocent until we learn more. The other thing I know is that dopers always have an excuse.

aquageek
July 28th, 2006, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by knelson
At this point I really don't know what to think. I know a couple things: one, Landis is still innocent until we learn more. The other thing I know is that dopers always have an excuse.

I'm with you on this. I read today where he thinks the drinking of some Jack Daniels the night before might have influenced the outcome. First, how could this even be possible and, second, how could he ride the ride of his life on a whisky hangover?

gull
July 28th, 2006, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by aquageek
I'm with you on this. I read today where he thinks the drinking of some Jack Daniels the night before might have influenced the outcome. First, how could this even be possible and, second, how could he ride the ride of his life on a whisky hangover?

He also suggested that the thyroid hormone he takes or the shot of cortisone (a glucocorticoid, not an anabolic steroid) he received in his hip could have affected the results. No way. Starting to sound like the usual excuses we hear when someone is caught.

Peter Cruise
July 28th, 2006, 01:13 PM
Perhaps someone showed him the Amanda Beard pictorial- I know my testosterone level went way up...

NotVeryFast
July 28th, 2006, 06:56 PM
Reading about the T/E test:
http://www.asada.gov.au/substances/facts/testosterone.htm
it seems to me that a positive result for Floyd Landis should not have been declared at this stage, as the required follow-up investigation has surely not yet taken place.

Dobbie
July 28th, 2006, 07:59 PM
it seems to me that a positive result for Floyd Landis should not have been declared at this stage, as the required follow-up investigation has surely not yet taken place.

I agree.....They shouldn't say anything until they have covered his explanation...
"In the case of a T/E result of greater than 4:1 and no other reliable analytical method applied it is mandatory that the relevant medical authority conducts an investigation before the sample is declared positive. "

Maybe he took some of Michelle Smith's Wiskey ???

Damage Inc
July 28th, 2006, 08:32 PM
Guilty until proven inocent. Thats the Tour de France and the French press.

gull
July 29th, 2006, 09:20 AM
I'm sure there's a simple, logical explanation for his test result.

Like, say, injecting himself with a banned substance.

aquageek
July 29th, 2006, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by Damage Inc
Guilty until proven inocent. Thats the Tour de France and the French press.

This isn't exactly guilty until proven innocent. He flunked the first test. He has the oppotunity to have his second sample tested now, as I understand it.

Someone told me this morning his ratio was 11:1 - is that in fact true?

Sam Perry
July 29th, 2006, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by gull80
I'm sure there's a simple, logical explanation for his test result.

Like, say, injecting himself with a banned substance.

Now that's funny!

Dobbie
July 29th, 2006, 07:17 PM
He just needs a logical explanation ?Let's help.

"After a bad 16th stage I pulled myself together and grew some balls overnight"
or
"I borrowed Jan's balls cause he didn't need them"
or
"I had a large plate of sweetbreads the night before"

Dobbie
July 29th, 2006, 07:36 PM
Justin Gatlin, the 2004 Olympic gold medalist who earlier this year tied the world record in the 100-meter dash, failed a doping test in April, testing positive for testosterone, he disclosed Saturday.
Gatlin, 24, an athlete who had reveled in portraying himself as a "genuinely clean champion," tested positive April 22 at the Kansas Relays, an early spring milestone on the track and field calendar.The failed Kansas test came just weeks before Gatlin tied the world record in the 100 meters, 9.77 seconds, a race run May 12 in Doha, Qatar. Gatlin was not notified until June 15 he had tested positive, Myler said Saturday-which explains why he was able to run in Qatar and through the U.S. nationals in Indianapolis, where he won the 100 meters in 9.93 seconds.

gull
July 30th, 2006, 01:45 PM
Here's a link to one of the best articles I've read on the subject of doping (and pertinent to this discussion):

http://www.gladwell.com/2001/2001_08_10_a_drug.htm

craiglll@yahoo.com
July 30th, 2006, 08:30 PM
I wsa talking this morning, I might have been wrong but did some one else test positive for testosterone during the Tour de France?

Dobbie
July 31st, 2006, 09:40 AM
Here's a link to one of the best articles I've read on the subject of doping (and pertinent to this discussion):

"Within weeks, her arms and shoulders began to thicken. She developed severe acne. Her pubic hair began to spread over her abdomen. Her libido soared out of control. Her voice turned gruff."

I got scared at this point....

knelson
July 31st, 2006, 11:12 AM
Here's another interesting article about doping: http://outside.away.com/outside/bodywork/200311/200311_drug_test_1.html

aquageek
July 31st, 2006, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by knelson
Here's another interesting article about doping: http://outside.away.com/outside/bodywork/200311/200311_drug_test_1.html

Very interesting. One thing I didn't realize before reading this was how much these drugs "assist" with recovery.

Frank Thompson
July 31st, 2006, 12:07 PM
Kirk:

Thanks for the great long article. Some of that stuff I never heard of and should be contibuted to the Hall of Shame website that has detailed history off all of this.

knelson
July 31st, 2006, 12:12 PM
Kind of interesting to see a story written by sort of a "weekend warrior" athlete in his forties who wondered what performance enhancing drugs would do for him. If this guy did it I'd say the odds are pretty good there are plenty of others like him. Performance enhancing drugs might not just be for elite athletes these days.

Frank Thompson
July 31st, 2006, 12:38 PM
Kirk:

Good observation. I hope that in the next two weeks we don't have any of this kinda activity happening at our competition. I guess we will see how everyone looks and how fast everyone swims before we can make our suspicions. I would hate to think that our Masters swimmers would subject themselves to this kinda of activity with all of the health risks involved. It might be naive not to think otherwise but would someone do this for a record, medal, or swim stardom. Are the awards worth the risks to someone's life?

knelson
July 31st, 2006, 12:56 PM
I know this topic has come up before. I doubt doping is a serious problem in masters swimming, but I also think it's probably not completely unheard of, either.

gull
July 31st, 2006, 02:12 PM
"What [Dr. Jones] did for me—supplying drugs solely for the purpose of increasing my athletic prowess—is not illegal, but it would certainly be frowned on by many of his colleagues."

From the website of the North Carolina Medical Board:

"The use of anabolic steroids, testosterone and its analogs, human growth hormone, human chorionic gonadotrophin, other preparations with anabolic properties, or autotransfusion in any form, to enhance athletic performance or muscle development for cosmetic, nontherapeutic reasons, in the absence of an established disease or deficiency state, is not a medically valid use of these medications.

The use of these medications under these conditions will subject the person licensed by the Board to investigation and potential sanctions."

Could explain why he doesn't allow his real name to be used in the article.

jonblank
July 31st, 2006, 05:34 PM
It's been announced that Justin Gatlin, co-World Recordholder in the 100 meter dash, who trains here in Raleigh NC, tested positive for steroids. His coach, Trevor Graham, publicly blames Sport Capitol's (unnamed) masseuse, who he states had a vendetta against Gatlin.

I do not personally know Mr. Gatlin, (though I'd like to meet him) but from every report he is honest and a crusader for "clean" sport. I really hope that he is innocent. It may be Pollyanna-like of me, but I want to believe that Justin Gatlin and Floyd Landis are clean. At that level of scrutiny, it continues to amaze me that others (not Gatlin and Landis, mind you) continue to try to outwit the control agencies.

Having said that, I also sincerely believed Mr. Clinton (Bill, not George) when he told us that he "didn't have sex with that woman. Ms. Lewinsky". I suppose I am too trusting a soul.

knelson
July 31st, 2006, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by jonblank
Having said that, I also sincerely believed Mr. Clinton (Bill, not George) when he told us that he "didn't have sex with that woman. Ms. Lewinsky". I suppose I am too trusting a soul.

It's o.k. It just all depends on what your definition of is is.:D

craiglll@yahoo.com
August 1st, 2006, 09:04 AM
I read in the Daily Illini that landis positive results were from artificial testosterone. There is a great article about Gatlin. The article is from The Associated PressI think the website is www.dailyillini.com It says that Gatlin was suspended previously because an amphetamine was found in medication he was taking for ADD.

jonblank
August 1st, 2006, 09:50 AM
Originally posted by craiglll@yahoo.com
I read in the Daily Illini that landis positive results were from artificial testosterone. There is a great article about Gatlin. The article is from The Associated PressI think the website is www.dailyillini.com It says that Gatlin was suspended previously because an amphetamine was found in medication he was taking for ADD.

Supposedly, it was this suspension which opened Gatlin's eyes to the perils of disallowed substance usage. He has gone on record as vehemently opposed to such behaviors.

By the way, I still believe Marion Jones, too. Though the circumstantial evidence has shaken my faith a bit, I must add.

craiglll@yahoo.com
August 2nd, 2006, 09:52 AM
Is Marin Jones truly see no evil, hear no evil, do no evil?

geochuck
May 26th, 2007, 12:28 PM
Dopers run rapid in cycling http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/6848682?MSNHPHMA

Frank Thompson
September 20th, 2007, 03:44 PM
The Floyd Landis decision is made with lots of controversy.

http://www.comcast.net/news/sports/index.jsp?cat=SPORTS&fn=/2007/09/20/768540.html&cvqh=itn_landis

Frank Thompson
August 24th, 2012, 12:49 PM
Ok with everything going on in the news today about Lance Armstrong, I had to bring this old thread up because we have discussing and debating this issue for over 8 years. The only other controversial thread on this subject matter that had more debate was the Dara Torres threads.

The question has to be asked is that will you remember Lance Armstrong for all the good or bad that he has done in sports, society, and in life?

Was the news today a public admission of guilt and therefore he becomes a fraud after all these years? Or is he a hero for coming back and beating cancer and winning 7 tours and starting a foundation? Has anyone changed there view on this from how they feel through the years because of this latest news?

I have provided links about all of news reports today and how their seems to be a changing of the tide against Lance Armstrong guilt or innocence.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/sports/cycling/lance-armstrong-ends-fight-against-doping-charges-losing-his-7-tour-de-france-titles.html

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more-sports/lance-armstrong-stripped-tour-de-france-titles-lifetime-ban-olympic-sports-drops-doping-appeal-article-1.1143295

http://lancearmstrong.com/news-events/lance-armstongs-statement-of-august-23-2012

http://www.bicycling.com/news/pro-cycling/lance-armstrongs-endgame

http://abcnews.go.com/US/lance-armstrong-ends-fight-doping-claims-lose-titles/story?id=17071209#.UDeZY6BZi7Q

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/post/lance-armstrong-judgment-day-arrives/2012/08/24/c1da6b8a-ede2-11e1-afd8-097e90f99d05_blog.html

Chris Stevenson
August 24th, 2012, 01:23 PM
Was the news today a public admission of guilt and therefore he becomes a fraud after all these years? Or is he a hero for coming back and beating cancer and winning 7 tours and starting a foundation? Has anyone changed their view on this from how they feel through the years because of this latest news?

What Armstrong did was incredible, both on the bike and off.

But no, I don't view his deeds the same way I once did. Honestly, the latest news had little impact; I lost my innocence in cycling matters when Hamilton was proven dirty, followed shortly by Landis. After those debacles I took every accomplishment and inspirational story (including Lance's) with huge heaps of salt.

SwimmeringEar
August 25th, 2012, 03:26 PM
Having watched him for many many years and cycling in general. Cycling is probably no dirtier than any other sport on the tele. American sport sweeps most of its problems under the rug whereas cycling does actually punish cheaters. Although as people get caught, it's very easy to think a large number as cheating since we always only see the tip of the iceberg on this and have no idea ourselves how deep the problems go. As far as Lance. What's the guy supposed to do? While he won 7 Tours, he was the most tested athlete. Not just urine too...also blood and anything they could test they basically took. The only part that at all has strange connotations to cheating is that some of the people he was around and trained under are known dopers. But as far as I know, he never took infamous trips that other cyclists did to the tops of the Italian mountains to go dope + train with those doctors. The USADA and Floyd Landis have had it out for Lance for some time, particularly since Landis was incredibly sore for being caught as a cheat. That's really when all of this picked up and hasn't stopped since. Landis now is known for being essentially a lier and a crook and is now paying $500k back to people who donated money to him for his legal fees so he doesn't get sued himself. As far as Lance's performance in tours, he never did anything superhuman and he had the strongest team behind him basically every year. There's a team time trial event that his team dominated, netting him 2-3 minutes on the entire field most of those tours. If all you have to do as Lance is stay on someone's wheel, that saves you 30% of your energy while the guy trying to beat you on the mountain has to do that +30% AND somehow be able to ride away from you. There were even days Lance cracked and lost time, but he never cracked bad enough to think his form would be poor the next day. So as far as his performance, it does not suggest he cheated, either by recovering at an inhuman rate or being able to run away at an inhuman rate. As far as I'm concerned, the USADA is a joke agency. If they really had actual evidence and cared about integrity, they would have presented it by now instead of causing a media whirlwind about it.