or Connect
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Doping in Cycling › why is just armstrong accused of doping?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

why is just armstrong accused of doping?

post #1 of 117
Thread Starter 
If lance armstrong is not clear then surely the likes of ivan basso who came so close to him in the mountains is not either?

And surely ullrich who came so close to lance in last years tour is not clear either-after all he has tested positive before even if it was in a 'personal crisis'

lets face it if armstrong isn't clear is anyone?

We love the sport for its speed so IF they are all drugged up to their eyeballs and i stress the if would we really want to watch it if they were clear- slower, less exciting and do we really want to end up seeing them walking up hill? lol

Im a fan of lance armstrong and personally think that lance is clear after the chemo i dont see why he would want to poison his body more but if he isnt clear is anyone?
post #2 of 117

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

Quote:
Originally Posted by wheresullrich?
If lance armstrong is not clear then surely the likes of ivan basso who came so close to him in the mountains is not either?

And surely ullrich who came so close to lance in last years tour is not clear either-after all he has tested positive before even if it was in a 'personal crisis'

lets face it if armstrong isn't clear is anyone?

We love the sport for its speed so IF they are all drugged up to their eyeballs and i stress the if would we really want to watch it if they were clear- slower, less exciting and do we really want to end up seeing them walking up hill? lol

I personally think that lance is clear after the chemo i dont see why he would want to poison his body more but if he isnt clear is anyone?
Last time I checked, it isn't American riders who have been getting suspended and banned, rather it is the European cyclists. As I stated before, I think a more compelling case could be made for JU. He's a product of the East German sports system, who's athletes were notorious dopers in international competition, and he has already proven that he uses drugs and has been banned for such. I think the fact that he won the TdF at such an early age, when he wasn't far removed this system bears this out.
post #3 of 117
Thread Starter 

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakebrake
Last time I checked, it isn't American riders who have been getting suspended and banned, rather it is the European cyclists. As I stated before, I think a more compelling case could be made for JU. He's a product of the East German sports system, who's athletes were notorious dopers in international competition, and he has already proven that he uses drugs and has been banned for such. I think the fact that he won the TdF at such an early age, when he wasn't far removed this system bears this out.
i think ya rite but sayin that pavel padrnos of the usps is in a bit of trouble with doping
post #4 of 117

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakebrake
Last time I checked, it isn't American riders who have been getting suspended and banned, rather it is the European cyclists. As I stated before, I think a more compelling case could be made for JU. He's a product of the East German sports system, who's athletes were notorious dopers in international competition, and he has already proven that he uses drugs and has been banned for such. I think the fact that he won the TdF at such an early age, when he wasn't far removed this system bears this out.
everybody knows east german sports system, do we know american system? is the system of kelly white, tim montgomery, marion jones, lance armstrong??
as i have said many times, there is no clean rider, but armstrong is the dirtiest
post #5 of 117

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miguel_garcia83
everybody knows east german sports system, do we know american system? is the system of kelly white, tim montgomery, marion jones, lance armstrong??
as i have said many times, there is no clean rider, but armstrong is the dirtiest
There is basically no sports "system" in the USA. Are you a biologic mass spectrometer since you know who the dirtiest cyclist is?

Why don't you just admit you dislike Americans? It is okay. We don't really like you either.
post #6 of 117

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

Anybody who thinks Lance and the rest of the Tour peloton is "clean" (as oppossed to "clear") is showing just how naive they are. Just because you are American I understand you want to believe that Lance is clean. Same applies for Aussies with McGee, the French with Virenque and Voecklar, the Brits with Millar... oops, I guess that one's been proven already...

In direct reply to the question "Why is only Armstrong accused of doping?", actually he is not. If you did a search on many of the rider's backgrounds you would find that many of them have been tainted with the doping brush... eg Ullrich was implicated in the Giro affair of 2002, we all know about Virenque, Brochard and the rest of the Festina gang, and so the list goes on...

My opinion is that the UCI does sweet FA in preventing, and I stress PREVENTING, doping from going on. Life ban I say.

One last thing, I wish the 'LA Confidential' book was available in English. I'd buy it for sure. It'd be great reading. Some truths revealed///...:::///
post #7 of 117

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wannabepro
Anybody who thinks Lance and the rest of the Tour peloton is "clean" (as oppossed to "clear") is showing just how naive they are. Just because you are American I understand you want to believe that Lance is clean. Same applies for Aussies with McGee, the French with Virenque and Voecklar, the Brits with Millar... oops, I guess that one's been proven already...

In direct reply to the question "Why is only Armstrong accused of doping?", actually he is not. If you did a search on many of the rider's backgrounds you would find that many of them have been tainted with the doping brush... eg Ullrich was implicated in the Giro affair of 2002, we all know about Virenque, Brochard and the rest of the Festina gang, and so the list goes on...

My opinion is that the UCI does sweet FA in preventing, and I stress PREVENTING, doping from going on. Life ban I say.

One last thing, I wish the 'LA Confidential' book was available in English. I'd buy it for sure. It'd be great reading. Some truths revealed///...:::///
festina riders admitted they had dopped because they were in jail, after willy boet was caught in the french border with doping substances in his car
and i dont see many diferences between festina and armstrong, just that justice lets armstrong go, if not he would have finished as virenque, zulle, dufaux and brochard
what happened to rumsas? police found other substances in his wifes car
whats the difference between finding drugs in rumsas wifes car and being treated by doctor ferrari?
post #8 of 117

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

Quote:
Originally Posted by babylou
There is basically no sports "system" in the USA. Are you a biologic mass spectrometer since you know who the dirtiest cyclist is?

Why don't you just admit you dislike Americans? It is okay. We don't really like you either.
you dont have to be a boilogic mass spectrometer or whatever to know that
you just have to read or watch the news
post #9 of 117

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miguel_garcia83
you dont have to be a boilogic mass spectrometer or whatever to know that
you just have to read or watch the news
I doubt if you know what a mass spectrometer is. This is a device that can identify specific chemicals within a concoction. Since you have admitted you are not a mass spectrometer then I must assume you are psychic like say Nostrodamus?

Since you continually state Armstrong dopes more than the rest please tell us which doping products he uses that the others do not.
post #10 of 117

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

Quote:
Originally Posted by babylou
I doubt if you know what a mass spectrometer is. This is a device that can identify specific chemicals within a concoction. Since you have admitted you are not a mass spectrometer then I must assume you are psychic like say Nostrodamus?

Since you continually state Armstrong dopes more than the rest please tell us which doping products he uses that the others do not.
we are not as developed in spain as you are in usa, you are more into the latest doping advances( i said doping and not antidoping ), maybe caused of that development
when lance will die of a heart attack in few years while slepping, everybody will wonder what caused his death, well i wont, and maybe limerickman doesnt wonder either
post #11 of 117

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

I have no doubt that this sport of cycling is corrupt and I agree with the previous poster the starting point in all of this is the UCI.
For many years drugs have been used in this sport under the aegis of the UCI.

In 1998, we had the Festina affair.
This should have been the turning point - there was a groundswell of opinion
that this saga should have been the line in the sand.
But no - the UCI and Hein Verbruggen in particular chose to ignore this.

The credibility of the sport was on the line and it needed soemthing to wipe away the stain.
Lance Armstrong's feel good story came along and the UCI, cycling press,
the team sponsors closed their eyes and the same show continued onwards.
All fine and dandy - except that more riders started dying prematurely and
customs and excise people continued to uncover trafficking and drug distribution of drugs in cycling.
So the core problem of people taking drugs in cycling is still with us.

Willy Voet stated on TV recently that sudden improvements in performances
was a clear indicator of drug usae in this sport of ours.

Lance Armstrongs record between 1992-1996 bears no comparison to his
1998-2004 record.
This is why he has been the focus of attention.
However he is not the only one accused of doping - look at Bjarne Riis in 1996.
post #12 of 117

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

Just a thought, and please correct me if my facts are wrong.

Armstrong was at Motorola before cancer (before Cofidis), and he was at US Postal after cancer. In LA Confidential, Lance is accused of doping both at Motorola and at US Postal.

If these charges were true, then why would we see any change in performance after cancer? The change in performance cannot be put down to doping. You could possibly argue that he was doping both before and after, or that he doesn't dope at all. Either way the improved performance must have come from the change in his body's physiology both through cancer and age, and changed training methods and a new approach to life.
post #13 of 117

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple
Just a thought, and please correct me if my facts are wrong.

Armstrong was at Motorola before cancer (before Cofidis), and he was at US Postal after cancer. In LA Confidential, Lance is accused of doping both at Motorola and at US Postal.

If these charges were true, then why would we see any change in performance after cancer? The change in performance cannot be put down to doping. You could possibly argue that he was doping both before and after, or that he doesn't dope at all. Either way the improved performance must have come from the change in his body's physiology both through cancer and age, and changed training methods and a new approach to life.
true. and thats exactly what he did. But that does not mean that he didn't/does dope
post #14 of 117

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

Quote:
Originally Posted by limerickman
I have no doubt that this sport of cycling is corrupt and I agree with the previous poster the starting point in all of this is the UCI.
For many years drugs have been used in this sport under the aegis of the UCI.

In 1998, we had the Festina affair.
This should have been the turning point - there was a groundswell of opinion
that this saga should have been the line in the sand.
But no - the UCI and Hein Verbruggen in particular chose to ignore this.

The credibility of the sport was on the line and it needed soemthing to wipe away the stain.
Lance Armstrong's feel good story came along and the UCI, cycling press,
the team sponsors closed their eyes and the same show continued onwards.
All fine and dandy - except that more riders started dying prematurely and
customs and excise people continued to uncover trafficking and drug distribution of drugs in cycling.
So the core problem of people taking drugs in cycling is still with us.

Willy Voet stated on TV recently that sudden improvements in performances
was a clear indicator of drug usae in this sport of ours.

Lance Armstrongs record between 1992-1996 bears no comparison to his
1998-2004 record.
This is why he has been the focus of attention.
However he is not the only one accused of doping - look at Bjarne Riis in 1996.
I think you have pretty much hit the nail on the head. I believe Bjarne Riis's nickname after his Tour de France win was 'Mr Sixty percent"!
I do think your criticism of Armstrong's before/after cancer record is a bit rough however. I think he could have developed into a good tour rider with the right training and preparation. He won some pretty big bike races before his illness. He had only just turned 25 when it was diagnozed. Take the Tour de France out of his post cancer record and I think the two phases of his career start to look a little more even. The former actually looks a little better that the latter.
post #15 of 117

Re: why is just armstrong accused of doping?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MGM
true. and thats exactly what he did. But that does not mean that he didn't/does dope
The reason Lance Armstrong will not admit he has ever used EPO is he has probably. Not as a performance enhancer but as a means of survival during his chemotherapy. That and dialysis are the two reasons synthetic EPO (recombinant DNA techniques) was created. To save lives.

The press knows this but is too ignorant to admit it has no benefit 6 weeks after cessation since the lifespan of red blood cells is quite short. The press also has the propensity to create issues from nothing.

Since the UCI requires blood hematocrit levels to be measured pre race, even if the riders were using EPO, it could only be used to the extent to build hematocrit to an even, safe level. The playing field is level.

There is little data to suggest use of EPO has any long term adverse health effects. Over use can lead to acute problems in the short term, especially when clotting factors are high and dehydration is present.

And one can always boost hematocrit by training at elevation (common for many althetes) or sleeping in an oxygen deprived atmosphere. Both of these measures are perfectly acceptable to all authorities and if it results in an elevated hematocrit, the athelete is refused participation in the event.

Lance is the most tested cyclist in the UCI. If you think he is using banned substances, you need to consult the UCI.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Doping in Cycling
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Doping in Cycling › why is just armstrong accused of doping?