Do you think lance is doping? yes or no - Page 41

Oskar · #**601** 04-15.-2005

If others that are not even close to him(as far as performance goes) are getting caught, then YES, he is on something that is not illegal, has not been detected yet, or has a great masking agent.

My 2 cents worth.

TimBooth · #**602** 04-18.-2005

If the UCI haven't banned it, it isn't 'doping'. He is taking all manner of stuff, just like everyone else in the peloton. Perhaps even something that only his team currently have. Natural progression from taking vitamin shots and anything else to help you win.

And to those Americans who said that Indurain and Merckx were "as good as LA..." I have only one thing to say to you - One Trick Pony. Indurain and Merckx rode just about every race each season, not just one. LA is a great rider, but not in the class of the other two.

tcklyde · #**603** 04-18.-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimBooth

LA is a great rider, but not in the class of the other two.

Glad we got that cleared up. Single most posted sentiment in this forum.

amog · #**604** 04-28.-2005

Hey guys! wake up!!

Now on HARD professional sports like cycling doping is not rare cheat, is the rutine, like diet, training, rest, etc.

And Lance is not the exception, he´s a hero and nobody will change that, but the fact about his "Dr. help" is not a thing that take off his effort because all his rivals need it too.

It´s a fact you can´t do a Tour and figth for the victory only with raice, pasta, chicken and "Centrum"!.
Everybody who have done a stage race know what Im talking about.

Lance it´s a hero. Doping its another part of be a pro cyclist.

bikeraph · #**605** 04-28.-2005

Saying that Lance is doping is like saying that Tyler Hamilton is doping or that the new Pope is German. I mean it's simply unbelievab......................

Oh my God!!! News Flash!!!! The Pope is German? Dogs and cats are sleeping together?

Isn't anyone sick of this discussion?

Chris_E · #**606** 04-28.-2005

yep. In a few months Lance and his drug use will be history, thank God

Mind you a no holds barred exopse of Mr Ferrari's time with USPS would make interesting reading.

meehs · #**607** 04-28.-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris_E

yep. In a few months Lance and his drug use will be history, thank God

Mind you a no holds barred exopse of Mr Ferrari's time with USPS would make interesting reading.

Out of curiousity, do you contend that your "idol" (over there to the left, pictured in your avatar) rides clean? Just wondering.

armydog · #**608** 04-28.-2005

I don't even know if anyone will read this post but I have to throw my 2 cents worth in.2 years ago I lost my wife of 15 years to cancer.She fought hard for 1 1/2 years before the fight became too much for her.ANYONE & I MEAN ANYONE WHO HAS FAMILY OR FRIENDS THAT HAVE FOUGHT CANCER SUCCESSFULLY OR IS FIGHTING THE FIGHT NOW CAN ATTEST TO THE ABSOLUTE REFUSAL OF THESE PEOPLE TO PUT ANYTHING INTO THIER BODY THAT COULD ADD TO THE DISEASE OR CAUSE A RELAPSE OF THE CONDITION!IF YOU BELIEVE LANCE IS DOPING YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT!

Chris_E · #**609** 04-29.-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by meehs

Out of curiousity, do you contend that your "idol" (over there to the left, pictured in your avatar) rides clean? Just wondering.

the sad thing about it is i just don't know. if i were to take an educated guess i would say the consistancy of Ullrich's results, especially in the Tour, would imply that he is less likely to have doped than anyone else. However, one can never be certain.

I come from a football (soccer) background and personally know a number of pros and ex-pros. Experience has taught me that sportsmen of any persuation are the last people that need to be put on a pedistal.

No Ullrich isn't my idol his just my favourite. I like his demeanor, his flare and the way he rides when he's on song. If you like he's the kind of rider i would like have like to have been.

I have no particular axe to grind with Armstrong i just don't believe the natural talent/work ethic explanation for his success.

Of course this is just my opinion so chill.

meehs · #**610** 04-29.-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris_E

the sad thing about it is i just don't know. if i were to take an educated guess i would say the consistancy of Ullrich's results, especially in the Tour, would imply that he is less likely to have doped than anyone else. However, one can never be certain.

I come from a football (soccer) background and personally know a number of pros and ex-pros. Experience has taught me that sportsmen of any persuation are the last people that need to be put on a pedistal.

No Ullrich isn't my idol his just my favourite. I like his demeanor, his flare and the way he rides when he's on song. If you like he's the kind of rider i would like have like to have been.

I have no particular axe to grind with Armstrong i just don't believe the natural talent/work ethic explanation for his success.

Of course this is just my opinion so chill.

It's cool, that's all I was asking for is your opinion. Everyone is entitled to one. I like Ullrich too for the same reasons that you like him. I'd like to see him win another Tour de France before he's done. Sorry I called him your "idol". I didn't even really think about it when I typed it and that was a little presumptuous of me. Didn't mean to be a dink.

FWIW: It's my opinion that most (if not all) of the top riders are using the same juice. I just think it's kind of funny that some people will point to one rider and call them a "doper" and a "cheat" but then they turn around and point to another rider, who is essentially riding at the same level and claim they're clean. That's all. I didn't mean to single you out in any way.

House · #**611** 04-29.-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris_E

the sad thing about it is i just don't know. if i were to take an educated guess i would say the consistancy of Ullrich's results, especially in the Tour, would imply that he is less likely to have doped than anyone else. However, one can never be certain.

I come from a football (soccer) background and personally know a number of pros and ex-pros. Experience has taught me that sportsmen of any persuation are the last people that need to be put on a pedistal.

No Ullrich isn't my idol his just my favourite. I like his demeanor, his flare and the way he rides when he's on song. If you like he's the kind of rider i would like have like to have been.

I have no particular axe to grind with Armstrong i just don't believe the natural talent/work ethic explanation for his success.

Of course this is just my opinion so chill.

I like Ullrich as well, but simply looking at backgrounds I would say he is more likely to dope then Armstrong, having come up through the East German sports system. It would make more sense based on what we know now about it. I am not saying he is or did, just saying if I had to pick one of them it would be Ullrich.

Chris_E · #**612** 04-29.-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by House

I like Ullrich as well, but simply looking at backgrounds I would say he is more likely to dope then Armstrong, having come up through the East German sports system. It would make more sense based on what we know now about it. I am not saying he is or did, just saying if I had to pick one of them it would be Ullrich.

Well you never know. However, i that think (or hope against hope) Ullie, and Zarbel for that matter, were too young to have been on a state sposored drug programme given that the Berlin wall fell in 1989.

God the thought of a 13 or 14 year-old Ullrich on juice is frightening.

House i'm not niave enough to think that Ullich didn't or hasn't tampered. He was afterall one of the many riders a few years ago who suddley became asthmatic and had to used a steroid inhaler.

No as mentioned ealier in this thread Ullrich throughout his career from junoirs to U23 to pro, was considered a phenomenom. He won his tour at the first attempt at 23 and was beaten in the next 1 by a known doper. Then Armstrong came back and he hasn't had a look in since.

Ullie's palmares doesn't show any great spikes as Armstrong's does (for whatever reason). His consistancy, the fact that, apart from the Tour, his results HAVE matched his talent lead me to suggest he is LESS likely to be a doper than others.

I would like to believe that if Ullrich was on dope he would have won more than 1 tour by now.

Of couse concievably he could be using the junk just to stand still. A sobering thought no?

House · #**613** 04-29.-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris_E

Well you never know. However, i that think (or hope against hope) Ullie, and Zarbel for that matter, were too young to have been on a state sposored drug programme given that the Berlin wall fell in 1989.

God the thought of a 13 or 14 year-old Ullrich on juice is frightening.

House i'm not niave enough to think that Ullich didn't or hasn't tampered. He was afterall one of the many riders a few years ago who suddley became asthmatic and had to used a steroid inhaler.

No as mentioned ealier in this thread Ullrich throughout his career from junoirs to U23 to pro, was considered a phenomenom. He won his tour at the first attempt at 23 and was beaten in the next 1 by a known doper. Then Armstrong came back and he hasn't had a look in since.

Ullie's palmares doesn't show any great spikes as Armstrong's does (for whatever reason). His consistancy, the fact that, apart from the Tour, his results HAVE matched his talent lead me to suggest he is LESS likely to be a doper than others.

I would like to believe that if Ullrich was on dope he would have won more than 1 tour by now.

Of couse concievably he could be using the junk just to stand still. A sobering thought no?

From what I read he entered the East German system at 14, which would have been 87 or 88. The sports system didn't just suddenly stop when the wall fell, so it is very plausible that those East German riders like Jan were in the system long enough to be doped. Plus the former coaches surely didn't just say "no more." Even if it was only a year or two, that's enough to learn what to do and what it does and decide to keep doing it. I have seen no proof of Jan doing anything and will make no accusations without any, just responding for info sake.

Chris_E · #**614** 04-30.-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by House

From what I read he entered the East German system at 14, which would have been 87 or 88. The sports system didn't just suddenly stop when the wall fell, so it is very plausible that those East German riders like Jan were in the system long enough to be doped. Plus the former coaches surely didn't just say "no more." Even if it was only a year or two, that's enough to learn what to do and what it does and decide to keep doing it. I have seen no proof of Jan doing anything and will make no accusations without any, just responding for info sake.

And herwithin lies the essence of this whole twardy debate. The very fact that we are discussing the merits of a riders (any riders) success based around the fact that he may or may not be doped is sad in the extreme.

All riders should be free from insinuation of any type, but of course there need for success and our need for them to be successful often dictates the extent they go to to achieve.

In the perfect world any artificial aid, be it performance or recovery enhancers, would be banned. However, in the world of sport as big business this is nothing more than a pipe dream.

Does Armstrong dope yes/no, did Ullrich yes/no? We can only speculate. But what is certain is the example they and others are setting for the youngsters (and i include Armstrong in this for his association with Farreri) who think the ONLY way to succeed is by using drugs, is nothing short of scandalous.

brick654 · #**615** 04-30.-2005

Someone said something to the effect that "No way would he use performance enhancers..." Oh, as much as winning seems to drive LA, I think he would in a heartbeat. And probably is. But not an illegal substance. In another vein, remember the Tour de France before last? LA was NOT the strongest rider in the race. His nemesis, big Jan probably was. But LA had the strongest team and JU didn't. The rest is history.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode