The mystery of Lances lost body weight

Patrick1983 said:

The myth is he lost 20% of his body weight with no loss in power

this would mean him losing totally fat and no muscle which anyone in medicene will tell you is impossible

plus back in 1994 pre-cancer he stated he was "165 pounds" which is according to my maths 75 kg

outside.away.com947flanc 2.htmlOpen ↗

today on the official tour website he claims to be 75 kg which means a grand total percentage of

0 yes 0% weight loss

can some one please explain who came up with this myth that he lost 20% of his body weight😕

Personally, I've never heard that myth before. Most of the figures I've seen say he lost 10 pounds. I'm not sure how you come up with the statement that if he didn't lose power, he must have only lost fat. You can certainly lose weight off your upper body, and power is not 100% connected to muscle mass. This is an aerobic sport after all.

Patrick1983 said:

The myth is he lost 20% of his body weight with no loss in power

this would mean him losing totally fat and no muscle which anyone in medicene will tell you is impossible

plus back in 1994 pre-cancer he stated he was "165 pounds" which is according to my maths 75 kg

outside.away.com947flanc 2.htmlOpen ↗

today on the official tour website he claims to be 75 kg which means a grand total percentage of

0 yes 0% weight loss

can some one please explain who came up with this myth that he lost 20% of his body weight😕

Everything I have read says 10-15lbs and it was all the extra muscle from his upperbody from swimming. Go find a pre cancer pic of Lance and you'll see it's quite obvious.

^^^^^ I heard the same thing as House ... 10 - 15lbs, upper body weight from swimming ...

3_days said:

^^^^^ I heard the same thing as House ... 10 - 15lbs, upper body weight from swimming ...

my point is that can anyone explain the improvment in his climbing when he weighs the exact same as he did pre cancer

Patrick1983 said:

my point is that can anyone explain the improvment in his climbing when he weighs the exact same as he did pre cancer

He moved the main muscle mass to where he needed it. All his muscles atrophied during the cancer battle. When he went back to training he developed where he needed to.

Your body will develop where it needs to. Lance clearly has less upper body mass now than his pre-cancer physique.

Coming back from cancer allowed him to use his knowledge to sculpt himself into the cyclist he needed to be.

lumpy said:

He moved the main muscle mass to where he needed it. All his muscles atrophied during the cancer battle. When he went back to training he developed where he needed to.

Your body will develop where it needs to. Lance clearly has less upper body mass now than his pre-cancer physique.

Coming back from cancer allowed him to use his knowledge to sculpt himself into the cyclist he needed to be.

how exactly do you dictate where you want muscle?

you cycle a bike ,you cannot dictate where the muscle goes

it is all lies imo

the reason for the improvment is DRUGS

Patrick1983 said:

how exactly do you dictate where you want muscle?

you cycle a bike ,you cannot dictate where the muscle goes

it is all lies imo

the reason for the improvment is DRUGS

So... your first post was just a troll? You're right. There's no possible way to improve on the bike if your weight stays the same. Hmmm. I'll have to rethink my training.

If you want to play in the big leagues your 'training' or preparation must include hormone supplementation and muscle rejuvenation.

If you intend to time trial or climb with the big boys, sustainable power will go up dramatically with blood doping. And training too---both are needed. But if you dope you can train much more frequently.

There are many methods and some seem to work better than others. (If you don't die first!) Hence the TDF whining by Francaise des Jeux's doctor & Didier Rous, 1998 Festina doper!

But riding your bike 750 miles a week won't get it done when other have a pharmaceutical edge.

see what the pros say about the rigged race!

abc.net.aus1415546.htmOpen ↗

kennf said:

So... your first post was just a troll? You're right. There's no possible way to improve on the bike if your weight stays the same. Hmmm. I'll have to rethink my training.

Patrick1983 said:

how exactly do you dictate where you want muscle?

you cycle a bike ,you cannot dictate where the muscle goes

it is all lies imo

the reason for the improvment is DRUGS

Perhaps you should do some research before making a comment as stupid as this.

Two comments:

1) Anyone who thinks you can't dictate where you make muscle gains is simply someone with absolutely no knowledge of what he is talking about.

2) Notice how Flyer conveniently goes away from the discussion into another tirade...the one based on his latest google find...which he has posted at least 10 times, at least 8 of which were in one thread.

When house learns our sport--you can listen to him.

It will be a very long wait.

Otherwise his silly posts are just commercial noise for the theater of the absurd

Get busy learning to ride track now. btw: we race counterclockwise there.

House said:

Two comments:

1) Anyone who thinks you can't dictate where you make muscle gains is simply someone with absolutely no knowledge of what he is talking about.

2) Notice how Flyer conveniently goes away from the discussion into another tirade...the one based on his latest google find...which he has posted at least 10 times, at least 8 of which were in one thread.

Flyer said:

When house learns our sport--you can listen to him.

It will be a very long wait.

Otherwise his silly posts are just commercial noise for the theater of the absurd

Get busy learning to ride track now. btw: we race counterclockwise there.

Nice comeback coward (still waiting for the response to my last PM about that track race, but then I did say you were to much of a coward to respond!)

Why don't you try (for once) to have an actual comeback to what was posted???

I'll help you out: Try arguing against what I said in #1

Are you up for it coward or will you just repost some old tirade?

House said:

Two comments:

1) Anyone who thinks you can't dictate where you make muscle gains is simply someone with absolutely no knowledge of what he is talking about.

2) Notice how Flyer conveniently goes away from the discussion into another tirade...the one based on his latest google find...which he has posted at least 10 times, at least 8 of which were in one thread.

You're on the money House with both comments.

I used to dig ditches for a living and have the arms, upper body strength and size to prove it. Hard physical labor caused my body to develop where it needed to. I didn't need steroids to get 17" arms. However because of my size, I pay dearly on rides.
Lance built his muscles where he needed them, core strength and legs. Of course the cardio too.

I'm getting so tired of Flyer hijacking threads and beating us over the head with his incessant dope rants. Fine, he has an opinion and I respect that, but I'm sure tired of reading it everywhere.

You probably want to exit the doping forum or avoid pro cycling all together.

Then your dream of a dope free world may come true.

In the meanwhile, lots of widespread doping---then lying about it to the public.

lumpy said:

You're on the money House with both comments.

I used to dig ditches for a living and have the arms, upper body strength and size to prove it. Hard physical labor caused my body to develop where it needed to. I didn't need steroids to get 17" arms. However because of my size, I pay dearly on rides.
Lance built his muscles where he needed them, core strength and legs. Of course the cardio too.

I'm getting so tired of Flyer hijacking threads and beating us over the head with his incessant dope rants. Fine, he has an opinion and I respect that, but I'm sure tired of reading it everywhere.

HOUSE

you are clearly a pro doper

DRUG CHEATS OUT!!!

lumpy said:

You're on the money House with both comments.

I used to dig ditches for a living and have the arms, upper body strength and size to prove it. Hard physical labor caused my body to develop where it needed to. I didn't need steroids to get 17" arms. However because of my size, I pay dearly on rides.
Lance built his muscles where he needed them, core strength and legs. Of course the cardio too.

I'm getting so tired of Flyer hijacking threads and beating us over the head with his incessant dope rants. Fine, he has an opinion and I respect that, but I'm sure tired of reading it everywhere.

I couldn't have said it any better myself, except possibly to add that having an opinion is one thing, not being able to recognize it as an opinion rather than established fact, is another.

Great post, Lumpy!

(Of course you do know you'll be referred to as "a doping apologist" now.) 😉

lets not get off the subject of the thread

lance has always claimed that a certain amount of weight loss was key to his improvment but he has not lost any weight

75k before and after cancer

common sense dictates that it is impossible to finish in the top 15-20 of the tour without doping and cheating

Phillipe Gilbert,David Moncoutie,Paul Kimmage,Christophe Bassons,greg lemond etc... have all come out and said cycling is riddled with drugs

why do we refuse to take our heads out of the sand?
because lance is our hero

it doesn't say much for your sad pathetic lives that you are so desperate to defend a guy whose actions have been a disgrace (Chasing,simeoni,getting rid of basons,ekimov spitting at simeoni)

after listening to his speech about the doubters of cycling,i had to laugh
lance-do you honestly belive people are that stupid that they take your achievments seriously?

seeing his mother claim that it was her work ethic that she gave to him that made his success was laughable

sadly not linda,your son is a scumbag who cheats his way to the top and wrecks the hopes of the guys who should be winning the tour

Patrick1983 said:

HOUSE

you are clearly a pro doper

DRUG CHEATS OUT!!!

And you clearly another idiot. Still waiting for you to respond to all the comments about how you can dictate where you put on muscle. You have chosen the path of the biggest moron on these forums, calling anyone who doesn't agree with you "pro doping." Here is a challenge for you, should you be man enough to accept it::

1)Show me one post I have made where I say I am for doping
2)Show one medical study that proves that you can't "dictate where muscle goes"

I am guessing you won't accept the challenge and will simply respond like the post I am responding to. Do you have the balls to give it a try?

House said:

And you clearly another idiot. Still waiting for you to respond to all the comments about how you can dictate where you put on muscle. You have chosen the path of the biggest moron on these forums, calling anyone who doesn't agree with you "pro doping." Here is a challenge for you, should you be man enough to accept it::

1)Show me one post I have made where I say I am for doping
2)Show one medical study that proves that you can't "dictate where muscle goes"

I am guessing you won't accept the challenge and will simply respond like the post I am responding to. Do you have the balls to give it a try?

obviously you can dictate where muscle goe by training that area
weightlifting=upper body
cycling=legs etc.....

so i was wrong,sorry!

but lance claims to have lost weight,it is proven that he has not

you say he lost weight from his upper body, so obviously this has gone to other places on his body

where on his body has this weight gone?

here are 2 photos pre cancer:
clintonphoto.comlance08.jpgOpen ↗
jsmcelvery.com95armstrong1.jpgOpen ↗

and here is one post cancer
roadcycling.comtourdefrance lance armstrong.jpgOpen ↗

imo there is no major difference

how can having cancer improve your climbing that much?
his weight has not changed-FACT
His Vo2 max has not changed-FACT

PLEASE explain how his climbing has improved post cancer?
you say he "dictated" where the muscle went but is see NO proof of this and it seems that you are making up facts to suit your argumnet

DRUG CHEATS OUT!!!