Armstong dopes AGAIN

Discussion in 'Professional Cycling' started by Chris_E, Aug 22, 2005.

  1. jhuskey

    jhuskey Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    10,606
    Likes Received:
    340

    Yes, he is gone at least for now.
     


  2. Dimos

    Dimos New Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    Messages:
    182
    Likes Received:
    0
    I guess Virenque, Thevenet & Fignon (whoa!! they' re all "frogs") told the tale. There are a lot af question marks that make these "disclosures" look disgusting a lot.
    For the moment being JM Leblanc holded a nice stance. I can't help but point out that Leblanc (as chief of TdF- an ASO "product") and Equipe (another ASO "product") are living in the same "home". So what's the use of these news now? Before the Tour (or maybe 3 years ago) it would have been useful. But now? There's a blow at both Lance and the race itself. Something like "we earned your US bucks (tourists), you (Lance- USPS- Tailwind- Nike etc) earned your piece of the cake (a BIG piece), let's reveal how we did it".

    PS. The samples were just numbered so the lab didn't know any names. The results were given to WADA which had the lists with the names. I mean: Can you understand WHO gave Lance's name to L'Equipe? Come on! It's easy! :rolleyes:
     
  3. ilpirata

    ilpirata New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Messages:
    410
    Likes Received:
    2
    The last great cyclist will one day have his name cleared. I really wish they would go back and test Pantani's retains, if they still have them. If it is really true that use of EPO can be detected with the WADA criterion, then this would certainly clear his name of all the falsehoods exploited mercilessly by the media (especially Italian media). The attacks on his reputation that led him to drug abuse, depression, and death.
    The use of epo in training is not talked about much,but can allow an athlete to reach a superb conditioning prior to a big event and then get off the train in time (if you will) to be ND on the tests.
     
  4. davidbod

    davidbod New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2003
    Messages:
    717
    Likes Received:
    0
    This will be interesting as it unfolds. I think it will prove to be one of the ultimate stories in slime ball journalism. Its a perfect scenario. Armstrong can't possibly defend himself and the accusers can't possibly prove anything either. I think one telling factor here is that 6 other rider's samples tested positive, yet they are not named? Witch Hunt.

    Should we now go back as far as there are available urine samples and retest every sample in inventory?
     
  5. MJtje

    MJtje New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    He still reads these forums and clearly it's ironic that this now happens.....maybe people should believe flyer a bit more.....But he also has troubles at dailypeloton doping forum.....everywhere he goes the mods don't like what he says.....



     
  6. meehs

    meehs New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,868
    Likes Received:
    0
    FYI: I've been posting on this forum for a long time and I've never wavered from that position. All you have to do is go back and read my previous posts on the topic. So if you're implying that I've changed my position to match the circumstances, you're wrong. FWIW, I don't even really consider myself a big "LA fan". I do respect his acheivments the same way that Hinault, Merckx, and most of his cycling contemporaries respect his achievements.

    Like I've said all along; It's completely absurd to believe that dope elevated Armstrong from being an "average rider" to one that has thoroughly dominated the peloton in the TdF for seven straight years and that all of his opponents are clean so therefore his victories can only be attributed to doping. Also, if any top professional cyclist were asked point blank in a public forum if they were doping (the way that LA has been repeatedly), I guarantee that every single one of them would answer: "No, I'm clean"

    So, what's the point? The "Armstrong witch hunt" continues to be completely ridiculous in a sport that's known to be riddled with doping problems. Just my opinion. Has been all along.
     
  7. whiteboytrash

    whiteboytrash New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    Messages:
    5,402
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, WADA stated in late 1999 early 2000 that they have a test for EPO but they need more time to develop it so it was water tight. They made an announcement that they would be retrospectively back dating their testing from 1999 onwards. The UCI adopted this policy as well and made a statement to the same effect. This is probably why he didn't test positive in 2000 because he knew there was a valid EPO test.

    So it all above board and was announced back in 1999 and was official policy of WADA and the UCI. It’s only now that L’Equipe have undertaken the cross referencing of the names of the riders tested and the coloration to the urine sample test result. So its not the French who are after him its just procedure that the UCI and WADA have followed.

    Now if you're calling WADA and the UCI witch hunters and have the problem then I think you better slow down as you may have the problem !
     
  8. meehs

    meehs New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,868
    Likes Received:
    0
    Did Flyer get banned because he continually attempted to turn every single thread into a doping debate? I mean despite the fact that he was very repetative and it really bacame annoying, I never knew him to be truly offensive. Does anyone know the circumstances that led up to him being banned?
     
  9. jhuskey

    jhuskey Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    10,606
    Likes Received:
    340

    I assumed he was still keeping an eye on the forum. It must be tough on him not getting to reply.
     
  10. Don Shipp

    Don Shipp New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,007
    Likes Received:
    0
    There are suddenly a lot of newbies on this forum site posting like they've been here a while. Perhaps one of them is Flyer with a new identity.
     
  11. jhuskey

    jhuskey Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    10,606
    Likes Received:
    340

    I know that he had been asked to moderate his post and stick to doping threads when posting about doping, but beyond that I don't know.
     
  12. nonameboy

    nonameboy New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    0
    i think they´re all dopped but i dont care anyway.
     
  13. JohnO

    JohnO New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,495
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  14. kennf

    kennf New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2004
    Messages:
    609
    Likes Received:
    0
    No way. You can spot his style a mile away.

    But here's a question: if they wanted to validate the accuracy of the new EPO test, why in the world wouldn't you test the frozen samples of the '98 peloton (which probably would have turned up 150 positives)? Or, why wouldn't you just have test subjects use EPO and test their urine, rather than testing six-year-old frozen urine samples.
     
  15. MJtje

    MJtje New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well he told me that he has an idea why he got banned.........did is what he posted on dailypeloton doping forum about it......He said he didn't get an explanation from cyclingforums.....


    A guy (flyer) got banned on an "Australian Owned Board" because he mentioned widespread doping at the Australian Institute of Sport and an external force scared management off. (Management supports the doping posts as evidenced by allowing over 6 months of them) European & Amercian doping is allowed with greater range.

    The banned poster even substantiated his claims "off-line" and within 90 minutes all threads re: AIS doping were deleted.

    They were deleted because they were TRUE. (More details may have been posted, if the poster had wanted to do so)

    If the claims had been false they would remained on the board.



     
  16. whiteboytrash

    whiteboytrash New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    Messages:
    5,402
    Likes Received:
    0
    Because the announcement was made in relation to the new 'pact' in response to the 1998 Tour. When the test was finally developed in 2000 they said they would retrospectively test from 1999 onwards. They chose 1999 as it was consider to be the new era and the clean start to a new way of running the sport.


     
  17. whiteboytrash

    whiteboytrash New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    Messages:
    5,402
    Likes Received:
    0
    Miguel Indurain says the accusations of doping made by French paper L'Equipe against Lance Armstrong are part of a campaign to discredit the American.

    The Spaniard, a five-time Tour de France winner, also questioned the legality of claims against Armstrong.

    "They have been out to get him in France for a number of years," Indurain told the website todociclismo.com.

    "He's the one who knows about it, but it seems wrong that they are starting to dig over tests from years ago."

    Armstrong has been plagued by accusations of drug abuse from elements of the French media since he won the first of his record seven Tour titles in 1999 after recovering from testicular cancer.

    But L'Equipe has now claimed signs of the blood-boosting drug EPO have been detected in samples of Armstrong's urine from the 1999 race.

    T
    here were no tests for the drug then, but the paper claims samples have recently been retested by the specialist anti-doping laboratory outside Paris.

    The Texan has always maintained he has never taken performance-enhancing drugs.

    The International Cycling Union said there were no positive drug tests from the urine and blood samples taken on the 2005 Tour de France, when Armstrong took his seventh win.

    Indurain, who won the Tour five straight times between 1991-1995, added: "It's all very strange. I don't know to what extent it is legal to keep specimens like this.

    "Anything about Armstrong is news these days, but the question is whether all this is true or not.

    "There are question marks over the reliability of the test (for EPO) and there are a lot of doubts about the whole thing."

    Germany's Jan Ullrich, the 1997 Tour winner who was also second three times to Armstrong, told German television: "I heard about it, but these are speculations so you can't really say anything about it.

    "It's been six years, and, if it's true, I would of course be disappointed.

    "But I can't say anything on it right now. Lance is the greatest of our time and maybe somebody's trying to put him down. I don't know what it's about, so all of this is very speculative."

    Swiss Alex Zuelle, who finished second behind Armstrong in the 1999 Tour, said: "I won't say anything about it because my career as a professional is over.

    "I'm not Armstrong. All of this is speculation. Sometimes they have proof, then they haven't ... I'm not interested in it anymore.

    "For me, the Tour is over and done with; it's just too many years back."

     
  18. whiteboytrash

    whiteboytrash New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    Messages:
    5,402
    Likes Received:
    0
    Drug body to scrutinise Armstrong



    The boss of the World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) says the organisation is looking into the latest doping claims against cycling legend Lance Armstrong.

    French paper L'Equipe claimed signs of EPO were found in samples of the seven-time Tour de France winner's urine from the 1999 race.

    Armstrong has denied the claims but Wada president Dick Pound said: "It's a pretty serious story if it is true.

    "We've not decided what we'd do because I've not looked at all the details."

    Pound said Wada would not be able to make a judgement until it had seen all the evidence.

    "We will look at the information available and then we will decide the best way to get as much light on this as possible," he said.

    Tests on the samples from the 1999 race were carried out in 2004 because cycling's governing body did not start using a urine test for EPO until 2001, L'Equipe said.


    Pound said the issue is a matter for the International Cycling Union (UCI) and USA Cycling, noting that Wada had not yet been formed when the samples were taken.

    "But what is good for me is it's a lesson to anybody using drugs that we may not catch you on day one, but sooner or later, the truth will come out," said Pound.

    "Now the riders involved have a serious responsibility to explain how it is that the substance got into the system."

    Wada was launched in November of 1999, four months after the samples would have been taken from Armstrong during his first Tour de France triumph.

    Armstrong says the L'Equipe article is part of a "witch-hunt".

    He added: "I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs."

     
  19. bobke

    bobke New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,134
    Likes Received:
    1

    They did do some tests on the 98 stuff. Wait till they release THOSE!!
     
  20. bobke

    bobke New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,134
    Likes Received:
    1
    Swiss Alex Zuelle, who finished second behind Armstrong in the 1999 Tour, said: "I won't say anything about it because my career as a professional is over.

    "I'm not Armstrong. All of this is speculation. Sometimes they have proof, then they haven't ... I'm not interested in it anymore.

    "For me, the Tour is over and done with; it's just too many years back." [/QUOTE]

    I wont say anythoing because the other positives from 99 were MINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
Loading...
Loading...