Armstrong has been tinkered with!!

[VeloFlash]

Hmmm. Maybe you don't know more than I do about cancer. I'd already seen that Stage I, II, III description you posted. That doesn't deter me from believing that someone who has cancer would perform more poorly than someone who does not, especially in world class athletic competition. We're talking about an environment where a 1% decrease in your ability to recover will result in your losing the race. If you don't recover as well, and it's a minute change, like 1%, you may not notice yourself the difference, except that you won't make it to the finish line as fast. You won't feel any pain or obvious extreme, unbearable fatigue. But your body is fighting a foreign invasion (not exactly, but for purposes of this discussion, let's call this spinning out of control of the body's abnormal cells a foreign invasion), albeit at that stage a localized one. Do you really think that the human body will expend NO energy on fighting that foreign invasion that it would have otherwise spent on recovery from the previous day's stage? This is the key on multi stage racing; it's recovery. If it weren't, then it would be like one day stage racing. Do you think you would be more likely to get bronchitis if your recovery process were mildly weakened by a foreign invasion? I'm afraid the answer is a resounding, "Yes."

Remember, it's not whether Armstrong thought he had cancer or not. He may have had it a lot longer than he realizes, even looking back on it now after all those years.

gntlmn, you do have one problem with your argument that primary testicular cancer may have been in existence for 4 years and suppressed his real performances. There have been many explanations advanced for LA's miraculous transformation. From LA himself, his coach and speculation from his public like yourself.

If the tc disease was the simple explanation that it existed in its primary stage from 1993 to 1996 causing him to abandon 3 TdF's and only finish once (24th I believe), don't you think this would have been trumpeted from LA citing an expert source like a specialised urologist?

It would be more palatable than more focus, training harder and weight loss leading to suspicions he is on PED's particularly when taken into context with his association with Ferrari.

 

[Tejano]

You really ought to lecture Lance & his doctor Michele Ferrari as they most certainly disagree with you re: a doping time bomb. Ferrari is on the public record proclaiming the helpfulness of PEDs as rejuvenators and vital health supplements to what is an impossible organic task, training for Grand Tours.

Words to consider.

Do you know where Ferrari said that? I´m interested!

 

[Tejano]

I find LA's explanations for his improvement to be unbelievable - quite simply.

The statistics are there for everyone to access.

I watched LA closely between 1992-1996 and he was, in relative terms, at best, a good one day rider.
Even on this basis though, he wasn't the best one dayer in 1992-1996.
Tafi, Museeuw, Zulle, Jalabert were all superior to him.

As a stage race rider, he was an also ran.
He never managed to win a major stage race like Paris-Nice, Dauphine or Midi Libre.

It's up to everyone to decide their view, of course.
Statistically, LA is not the rider he was between 1992-1996.
And his explantion for his improvement does ring true.

"The Mother of all Myths" straight from the mules mouth!

LA showed more systematic progress than Indurain! But I´m not sure Indurain is a good example because was "The Man" during the dirtiest times cycling has ever experienced!

There was no dramatic change! Why did LA drop out of the TDF in ´93,´94, & ´96?

Riddle me that!

 

[Tejano]

Reiterating Lim's last line:
And his explantion for his improvement does ring true.

I knew you'd come around buddy.
I think what you're really upset about is that your theory about super champions having a pedigree is flawed.

One thing's for sure - whatever Lance's results might be in the Spring Classics (are we still allowed to call them that?) there's going to be a lot more speculation and you'll either have more ammunition or more grief.

What thread did you discuss the pedigree theory?

 

[Tejano]

Miguel Indurain told you he feared Ullrich. Right.
Well maybe, everyone thought Jan would rule for several years.

But Indurain goes to Austin to be in the Ride for the Roses.
Indurain spends time with Lance working on pedal cadence and climbing.
Indurain predicts Lance as the one to watch in the Tour de France in 1999 before anyone had any idea he could succeed.

As for the many other mistakes posted above, Lance's big engine means his VO2Max is high, not that he had the training to finish a grand Tour at age 21, 22, 23. Lots of one day classics guys have trouble finishing the Tour, especially when young.

If one watches videos over time one sees the progression Lance was already making before cancer toward becoming a stage race rider. He was already planning on becoming a Tour rider.

In an interview right after recovery from cancer though, he said that the emergence of Ullrich meant he probably would not try that, he was worried the training would reduce his immune system. Turns out he WAS able to tolerate the training etc but interesting that Lance also, like most people, saw Ullrich as the likely dominator after 96/97.

It was the retaining of power and loss of weight along with the above mentioned technique improvements and tactical savvy of Bruyneel which helped.

Tell me more about Indurain working with LA on climbing and pedal cadence!
Where did you get that?

 

[gntlmn]

gntlmn, you do have one problem with your argument that primary testicular cancer may have been in existence for 4 years and suppressed his real performances. There have been many explanations advanced for LA's miraculous transformation. From LA himself, his coach and speculation from his public like yourself.

If the tc disease was the simple explanation that it existed in its primary stage from 1993 to 1996 causing him to abandon 3 TdF's and only finish once (24th I believe), don't you think this would have been trumpeted from LA citing an expert source like a specialised urologist?

It would be more palatable than more focus, training harder and weight loss leading to suspicions he is on PED's particularly when taken into context with his association with Ferrari.

I'm not making excuses for his 1993-96 performances. After all, he was ranked number 1 cyclist in the world in 1996 based on his results, not based on his later dominance in the TdF.

What I'm posing is that he may have been even better back then were it not for the early stages of testicular cancer. I am posing the possibility that it might have hampered his performance earlier than 1996.

As for dropping out of the Tours early, that was always part of the plan early on in this rider's career. Too many young riders try to do more than they are ready for at too young an age in the Tour de France. I've been on the record in these forums to repeat the strategy of his managers back then in the early/mid 90's, that they weren't going for the final GC. They were only interested in individual stages. They considered it a supreme waste of talent to burn out a young rider too early in his career in the TdF. As Indurain used to say, "You have to learn how to walk before you can run."

 

[Carrera]

One possible angle might be that Lance literally stared death in the face when he was given a 45 per cent chance of survival. Anyone who is diagnosed with cancer and given a 45 per cent chance of living, undergoes a huge shock. My best friend, for example, contracted cancer and died from it.
Surviving a possible terminal illness makes a huge impression on your mental attitude. I don't doubt Lance uses drugs but, hey, so do most other world class athletes. Those top athletes who go on to dominate a sport don't enjoy superiority simply due to drugs. A huge component is mental attitude.
Lance probably decided he would give his all to cycling when he realised he had a second chance at living. He would have trained exceptionally hard, had the best team scientists helping him and he would have been more hungry than anyone else. Lance is also extremely professional in his preparation. He spends time on all the major climbs planning his gearing down to an exact science, riding the cobbles e.t.c.
These factors make a difference.
Miguel Indurain, of course, was a genetic freak with a 28 beats per minute resting pulse. Merkcx, on the other hand, was once told to forget cycling since his heart wasn't big enough for a champion rider. Yet Merckx was unstoppable in his day.

I don't understand the question.

My premise is that LA was, at best a one day rider, pre cancer.
Then he was diagnosed with cancer and is out of the peloton for two years.
He comes back in the Vuelta in 1998 and he starts this winning streak.
He outclimbs the greatest climbers, he outsprints people, he out rolls everyone.
This is the same man who could only finish one TDF between 1992-1996.

To me the explanation for his improvement from pre-cancer to post cancer doesn't ring true (he tells us it's hard work, weight loss, more focus).
Everything I have read about LA pre cancer showed me a cyclist who trained bloody hard (see David Walsh's interview in the 1993 book "Inside the TDF",
with LA) and who was totally focussed.
The only other mitigating factor is weightloss and LA wants us to accept this
as his premise for his improvement.

That's my issue - LA's explanation for his improvement.
I don't believe that he is telling us the truth.

 

[indigo_pete]

The "Mother of all Myths" an outright lie! Armstrong progressed systematically from 1993 to 2001! There was no, let me repeat NO dramatic transformation!

That is a lie created by the haters to link LA to PED´s!

Absolutely!! Couldn't agree more. What if LA really does train harder & longer than any other cyclist - combine with superior genetics? What if??? What if LA really IS genetically gifted? Did Andre the Giant become 7 foot from PEDs?? No, he's genetically....well...different (acromegaly actually).

LA was always destined for greatness in whatever endurace sport he chose. We could see this in his teen years. Had he stayed with Triathlon, he would have been the next Mark Allen. (no offense Norman!)

I'll miss seeing his cycling at the end of the TDF!!

 

[gntlmn]

Merkcx, on the other hand, was once told to forget cycling since his heart wasn't big enough for a champion rider. Yet Merckx was unstoppable in his day.

I'm reminded of the other big European in another sport who was told something similar. He was at the time 6'2", 160 lbs, enormous by marathon standards, and yet that was his specialty. They told him he wouldn't amount to much because his oxygen uptake wasn't big enough. Yet he trained like a mad dog, bursting onto the scene only a couple of years before Merckx was made his mark with his shocking performance in the 1969 Tour de France. Both athletes were doing it by training way more miles than other athletes in their respective disciplines, and Derek Clayton, the athlete I am referring to, would concentrate on form, which is ever so important in running. He said he was about to a point where his legs barely lifted, stride for stride. Any lifting motion, save to avoid tripping over a pebble or loose gravel, is wasted effort. It's not easy to perfect the form, but when you do, it makes a huge difference. He also trained 160 or 170 miles a week, sometimes more than 200 miles in a week. That is huge mileage. His world record in the marathon stood for 13 years, and he is the only runner in the past something like 40 years who has broken his own world record in the marathon. He set his final mark in 1969, the year of Clayton/Merckx, both fanatical overdistance trainers.

My guess is that Merckx took the advice to heart about his low VO2 Max (pardon the pun). That's why he was so fanatical about his weight. If you don't have much extra VO2 uptake to spare, you realize the great importance of not carrying any extra weight at all. Furthermore, I suspect that he focused greatly on his form as well, and this too is a big factor in cycling, as it is in running.

Here is the link on the legendary Irishman, Derek Clayton, who started in Ireland and ended in Australia.

http://www.time-to-run.com/marathon/athletes/clayton.htm

 

[bobke]

Tell me more about Indurain working with LA on climbing and pedal cadence!
Where did you get that?

Its in his book, try reading it.
Paul Sherwen comments on it "all of the time" during his TdF commentaries.

So much so that when I had beers with Paul and Phil and Bob Roll when they were in Connecticut calling the Giro three years ago I got Paul to tell me about it. You see, Paul was at the Ride for the Roses and saw myjersey on a fundraising ride in CT for an employee of OLN who just has a heart transplant. A bunch of folks got together to do a fundraising ride and I went down--only forty or so riders.

Paul made a point of coming up while riding and asking about the Ride for the Roses Jersey which I had wore. Then after they asked me to go out for beer, and well I asked him a lot of stuff about Lance. Paul of course was PR guy for Team Motorola back when Lance was a classics rider so they go back a long way.

What is not in the book is that Paul was the translator for Alain Bondue when Team Cofidis came to the US to see Lance "recovering" from cancer in the middle of the worst part of chemotherapy. Paul Sherwen was the guy, since he speaks French fluently, to translate for Bondue the directuer sportif for Cofidis. LA's new team, and Lance's manager. Sherwen had also raced for Bondue.

ANyway, why would you doubt the comment about Indurain talking to Lance about cadence, climbing and TTs?
Indurain has always been a Lance supporter and was the guy who alone predicited Lance's victory in 1999.

 

[VeloFlash]

I think you are wrong, that's all. The testicular cancer was probably in the testis for at least 9 months, maybe longer. It was surely in his lungs during the summer when he performed in the Olympics. I know this because I am a physician and because I saw this happen to a friend who kept going back to the doctor with vague respiratory complaints for four months before he was diagnosed and eventually died of T.C.

In his book, Armstrong only indicated he had problems with his lungs that were later diagnosed to be linked with his tc in late September 1996 when he coughed up blood (not lungs) for the first and only time.

The only specific symptoms that evidenced the cancer had invaded his body occurred in late September 1996. As a physician you should be aware that Stage 1 tc cannot be detected through physical checks other than an examination of the testes through an ultrasound and then biopsy. It has not left a calling card in the body to give signs of its preinvasive existence.

If you have medical references that the preinvasive existence of testicular cancer has a detrimental effect on the feeling of well being and, therefore, athletic performance I would appreciate you provide same. The case examples I have seen inform that Stage 1 tc can exist for a long period of time without symptoms and be unnoticed.

But no argument, the cancer had NOTHING to do with his performance before spring of 1996. I think it may have and probably was affecting him even in the Tour DuPont 96-he won but got blown away by Pascal Herve on Beech Mountain, yes, Pascal Herve on Festins pre 1998 TdF whose HcT was probably %55, but Lance in the video says he felt bad and short of breath and just didnt have it on that climb. Who Knows?

If the cancer had nothing to do with his performances 1993-1995 but affected his performances from Spring 1996 onwards, why was his Spring 1996 performances superior? I quote from his book:

"Cycling is a sport that rewards mature champions. It takes a physical endurance built up over years, and a head for strategy that comes only with experience. By 1996 I felt I was finally coming into my prime. That spring, I won a race called the Fleche-Wallonne, a grueling test through the Ardennes that no American had ever conquered before. I finished second in Liege-Bastogne-Liege, a classic race of 167 miles in a single punishing day. And I won the Tour Du Pont, 1,225 miles over 12 days through the Carolina mountains. I added five more second-place finishes to those results, and I was about to break into the top five in the international rankings for the first time in my career."

 

[gntlmn]

Indurain has always been a Lance supporter and was the guy who alone predicited Lance's victory in 1999.

I remember reading how Lance had met up with him by chance in an elevator that year. He'd been training in Spain and had set a new record on one climb. It's an informal record kept by cyclists by word of mouth. Maybe you know that hill offhand. Anyway, when he told Indurain how fast he was going up that hill and that he had his training and his eyes on the Tour, I think that's when Indurain realized he would win. Not long afterward, he went on record with the media, predicting Lance's first win in the Tour de France.

 

[bobke]

In his book, Armstrong only indicated he had problems with his lungs that were later diagnosed to be linked with his tc in late September 1996 when he coughed up blood (not lungs) for the first and only time.

The only specific symptoms that evidenced the cancer had invaded his body occurred in late September 1996. As a physician you should be aware that Stage 1 tc cannot be detected through physical checks other than an examination of the testes through an ultrasound and then biopsy. It has not left a calling card in the body to give signs of its preinvasive existence.

If you have medical references that the preinvasive existence of testicular cancer has a detrimental effect on the feeling of well being and, therefore, athletic performance I would appreciate you provide same. The case examples I have seen inform that Stage 1 tc can exist for a long period of time without symptoms and be unnoticed.

If the cancer had nothing to do with his performances 1993-1995 but affected his performances from Spring 1996 onwards, why was his Spring 1996 performances superior? I quote from his book:

"Cycling is a sport that rewards mature champions. It takes a physical endurance built up over years, and a head for strategy that comes only with experience. By 1996 I felt I was finally coming into my prime. That spring, I won a race called the Fleche-Wallonne, a grueling test through the Ardennes that no American had ever conquered before. I finished second in Liege-Bastogne-Liege, a classic race of 167 miles in a single punishing day. And I won the Tour Du Pont, 1,225 miles over 12 days through the Carolina mountains. I added five more second-place finishes to those results, and I was about to break into the top five in the international rankings for the first time in my career."

Yes, without the cancer he would have been winning even more.
Recall even that he lost to I think Berzin in Liege, who was doped to the gills.
Anyway I digress, no one can prove whether the cnacer was affecting him at such and such time, but for sure over the summer and I think by late spring at Dipont but hey I dont know.
But certainly not in 1994 etc.
As for coughing up blood in September, that would of course likely be a late symptom of having cancer metastasize into your lungs, weeks and weeks after lung tissue and oxygen exchange is compromised by the twelve golf ball size tumors in his lungs.
I mean have you ever gone for a ride with a chest cold or mild asthma or lung problem,makes it hard to conceive how he did it.

 

[scott0425]

I think that some drugs have been found in some cases. What or where are these lots of drugs you are referring to? Regarding your statement about the Bristol Myers Squibb advertisement, you state they brag that Lance "uses" their products? I was under the impression that he may have used their products while undergoing treatment. He still uses their products?

I agree with some of your points, but I do have to say that your opinion, which you are entitled to, is a little strong for me at times. I personally do not think that I am a naive cycling fan, but if you or someone else wants to think that I am, so be it. Doesn't mean that I am though.

As I have said before, I am a cancer survivor myself, and I must say that my mindset changed following cancer. Now, this does not mean I am going to automatically become a better family man, or a more caring person, or a better cyclist. I like to think that I have though. But, I will say that I am more driven and live life a little more fully than prior to being diagnosed with cancer.

The fact that Lance returned to winning bike races does not make him guilty of anything, other than wanting to win bike races. Unless you are directly connected to him I would say you know nothing about his "family time". I have separated from my wife following cancer treatment and I am a cyclist, but that does not automatically make me a doper or mean I am not devoted to my kids and family. Sure, I am not Lance Armstrong, hell, I don't even consider myself a fan of his, and I surely don't know everything that he does. I don't want to know everything that he does because he has his life and his reasons for doing things and I have mine. I do think he works hard at training and I do not think that all pro bike racers train as hard as he does. I do believe that hard work pays off and some people are capable of working harder than others.

Just my opinion.

For the record, I am a neophyte on a bike. I typically do a "long" ride of 2 hours...I have been riding for all of 2 years, and not constantly at that.... but my 2cents says that I agree w/ JC....I work as a PA in a cancer center (5 years) and I see regularly the transformation in people who have had cancer. Whether or not they beat it long-term, they are changed, usually for the better. Their definition of 'hard work' changes. What was previously called 'hard work' is now a light day of training in those patients who are young and involved in some sort of training. IMO, LA now views his former training days as easy relative to what he has been through and does now.
Let me clarify this....doping? I haven't a clue. I find it hard to believe he is the only one w/ access to these super-drugs that have never been detected in testing. But I also believe that cycling, like every other major sport, lives by the belief that "it's not cheating unless you get caught"....I personally would be a little disappointed to find out he cheated, but to me, those I work with, and the patients who all wear the yellow wrist band, he is the ultimate in inspiration......SS

 

[scott0425]

Hmmm. Maybe you don't know more than I do about cancer. I'd already seen that Stage I, II, III description you posted. That doesn't deter me from believing that someone who has cancer would perform more poorly than someone who does not, especially in world class athletic competition. We're talking about an environment where a 1% decrease in your ability to recover will result in your losing the race. If you don't recover as well, and it's a minute change, like 1%, you may not notice yourself the difference, except that you won't make it to the finish line as fast. You won't feel any pain or obvious extreme, unbearable fatigue. But your body is fighting a foreign invasion (not exactly, but for purposes of this discussion, let's call this spinning out of control of the body's abnormal cells a foreign invasion), albeit at that stage a localized one. Do you really think that the human body will expend NO energy on fighting that foreign invasion that it would have otherwise spent on recovery from the previous day's stage? This is the key on multi stage racing; it's recovery. If it weren't, then it would be like one day stage racing. Do you think you would be more likely to get bronchitis if your recovery process were mildly weakened by a foreign invasion? I'm afraid the answer is a resounding, "Yes."

Remember, it's not whether Armstrong thought he had cancer or not. He may have had it a lot longer than he realizes, even looking back on it now after all those years.

Maybe/probably true, though I doubt back as far as '93. Yes, a stage I testicular ca. can make an impact. Not one that the avg. joe will notice, but cancer is a hypermetabolic state and may cause a measurable performance loss. Primarily from its taking calories/fuel from the body, but also from the bodies response. Energy is diverted to the immune system. So is it possible a highly tuned athlete will have performance fall off from an early cancer, sure.

 

[Tejano]

Pre cancer 2 semi-Classics and a Worlds (when no one was racing because of the cold and wet) - post cancer 6 straight TdFs. I hear a lot about his amazing VO2, this that and the other - he had all those physical advantages pre cancer presumably? I don't believe a word of it.

When I saw this I thought of Limerickman! I know he likes Indurain!

-Stuart Stevens. "He Is Miguel, of Course".
Everybody, it seems, has a theory about Miguel Indurain.

Take, for instance, the thighbone theory, an ostensible favorite of his longtime coach, José Miguel Echavarri. "The secret's in the length of his build," he says. "His legs provide more power than other riders can generate."

Then there's the temperament theory. Temperament, as in the placid demeanor that Indurain manages to maintain even in the most trying of moments. Temperament, as in his uncanny ability to mask his emotions (read suffering) from his opponents. And temperament, as in patience, a point that teammate Andy Hampsten stresses. "Miguel was willing to work his way up through the ranks of his team," he says, "even though he was already good enough to be the star. It helped him develop without burning out too early."

There is also the heart-and-lung theory, one that I'm a bit partial to. True believers in the heart-and-lung theory insist that Indurain's heart beats once a day or so and that his lungs are the size of a pair of Honda Civics parked side by side. Sports Illustrated was quite taken with this notion, promising in a 1993 article that Indurain's lungs were "so huge that if you look carefully at his lower back as he pedals a bike, you can make out their gentle heaving."

Or the weight theory, advanced by Spanish cycling journalists like Inglo Munoyerro, who has followed Indurain since he was a teenager. "He used to be a little heavier," Munoyerro says. "It makes a big difference."



When I first saw this I thought “That´s the god damn ´Urban Myth´”, but I read it again and saw it was about Big Mig and not LA!



- Roy Wallack. “The Drop Zone”

In the fall of 1990, the six-foot-two-inch Spanish rider [Miguel Indurain] weighed a muscular 184 pounds—too heavy to stay competitive in the mountain stages of the Tour de France. But that winter, a consultant to Indurain's team, Max Testa, now director of sports performance at the University of California at Davis, figured out the optimal ratio of power to body weight for cyclists, based on his studies of past Tour winners (The Golden Ratio). To reach it, Indurain had to shed only 12 pounds. Which he did. The next year he won his first of five consecutive Tours.

-Robert Messenger. “Making the grandest tour”

Indurain debuted as a professional cyclist at 195 pounds, but won his first Tour weighing in at 172. A world-class athlete lost 13 percent of his body weight to compete at the highest levels.



In 1985 Miguel Indurain dropped out of the TDF after the fourth stage. He didn´t even make it to the mountains!

In 1986 he quit during the 12th stage (He couldn´t even finish the first mountain stage.)

In 1987 he finished 2 hr. 53 min. 11 sec. off the pace!



My question is this! If Indurain had this Big Engine, if he was colossus in cycling terms, where was his “Big Engine” in 1985-1987? He managed to finish only 1 TDF in his first 3 attempts! He didn´t even make it over a mountain in his first two tries! And when he finally did he was 20 minutes back on L´Alpe D´Huez and 20 minutes down on Luz Ardiden!

Did Big Mig have a pedigree then? Wasn´t Indurain a client of the first Dr. Frankenstein? That was a pretty big transformation! Then he goes on to win 5 straight TDF´S! I don´t buy it!

 

[VeloFlash]

When I saw this I thought of Limerickman! I know he likes Indurain! <snip>

Limerickman would repeat to you the same as he has contributed in the past.

The difference between Big Mig and LA in their early years was Big Mig was engaged as a domestique to protect and enhance the points opportunities for his team leader, sprinter and climber. He was a workhorse whose presence in the team was to bust his guts for others and not for any self aggrandisement.

On the other hand, LA was drafted into the Motorola team from the outset as team leader and GC contender. He was expected to perform with the assistance of some very experienced and well reputed team mates.

 

[Tejano]

Limerickman would repeat to you the same as he has contributed in the past.

The difference between Big Mig and LA in their early years was Big Mig was engaged as a domestique to protect and enhance the points opportunities for his team leader, sprinter and climber. He was a workhorse whose presence in the team was to bust his guts for others and not for any self aggrandisement.

I thought a good domestique was supposed to finish the damn race! He blew out all his guts during the first 3 stages in 1985? He didn´t even make it over the first Mountain stage 1986? I don´t think he helped his climbers much their! What kind of domestique was he????????
-Stuart Stevens. "He Is Miguel, of Course". Describing a young Indurain

"Indurain, who as a young scrub in the 1980s always showed promise but rarely demonstrated brilliance"

Why one might ask was he a quote "Domestique" un quote? Because he wasn´t a good rider! If he was a good rider at that time he would have had more responsibility!

[/QUOTE]On the other hand, LA was drafted into the Motorola team from the outset as team leader and GC contender. He was expected to perform with the assistance of some very experienced and well reputed team mates.[/QUOTE]
Maybe Armstrong was going to be a GC contender in the future but he NEVER was never targeting a GC in the TDF pre-cancer!

- Todd Balf Outside magazine. "I'm Not the Next Greg LeMond. I'm the First Lance Armstrong.". July 1994

they announced that Armstrong would start in the Tour de France. Many, including Carmichael, thought he shouldn't ride it—that the impressionable Armstrong, who would be the youngest rider in the field, would overextend himself in the world's most grueling cycling race and possibly put the rest of his season in jeopardy. But Jim Ochowicz wasn't to be swayed; Armstrong was suddenly a hot commodity and gung ho to race.



The hope was that Armstrong would win a stage and then drop out before the difficult climbing legs in the Pyrenees, and amazingly enough that's what happened. He dramatically stole a win in the 114-mile stage from Chalons-sur-Marne to Verdun, coming desperately close to crashing into the course barriers as he outsprinted the rest of the lead pack over the last 50 yards.

"People say because I'm 21 I can't handle this intensity," said a jubilant Armstrong, who had started slowly in the Tour eight days earlier. "But the fact remains that I've felt better every day. Today was the proof." Four days later Ochowicz pulled him out of the race to begin preparations for the World Championships, one month away.

At the age of 21 Indurain dropped out during the 4th stage while Armstrong dropped out in the 12 stage and even won a TDF stage "one of the youngest riders to ever win a TDF stage".

They had the same plan for Armstrong in the 1994 TDF pull him out before the difficult Alps!

- LA June 1996
``The Tour de France is the best preparation for the Olympics,'' says [Lance] Armstrong, a former world champion and Tour stage winner. ``I'm not competing for the overall title this year because of the Olympics. It's truly the hardest race, it's three weeks at the highest level of competition,''


-USA Today. "Armstrong looks ahead to Olympics". July 8th, 1996

Plagued by a persistent cough and what he fears is bronchitis, Armstrong had to stop during the sixth stage of the Tour de France as the weather worsened and the mountains loomed.

``I think I've got bronchitis, and even if the Olympics weren't ..."

How many tumors did he have in his lungs at that time?????????????


The only valid point you may have is when comparing Armstrong and Indurain at 23

LA at 23 in 1995 TDF 1 hr. 28 min. back
MI at 23 in 1987 TDF 2 hr. 53 min. back

Over an hour difference! If Big Mig had a big engine in ´85-´86 he would have at least finished one mountain stage! But he didn´t! Armstrong finished at least 5 if I remember correctly!

 

[Dead Star]

oh come along now. You do know why Armstrong was able to do so well?

 

[MJtje]

There are more reasons people could loose contact with the peloton and thus lose a lot of time. Positioning is also a big reason why a lot of youngsters are loosing ground. T. Dekker has allready lost 15 min in the first stages. Frans Maassen (directeur sportif) has allready said that was unnecessisary, but younger people tend to sit to much at the back of the peloton. Just wanting to say I wouldn't put to much thought in those times.......they (lance/indurain) were both young maybe one was further then the other.......and one other thing youre comparing Indurain when he was young and armstrong, they both raced in different years (80'ies and 90'ies was big difference). Just a thought.......haha but still not a step further to finding out if one or the other was d..ing

I thought a good domestique was supposed to finish the damn race! He blew out all his guts during the first 3 stages in 1985? He didn´t even make it over the first Mountain stage 1986? I don´t think he helped his climbers much their! What kind of domestique was he????????
-Stuart Stevens. "He Is Miguel, of Course". Describing a young Indurain

"Indurain, who as a young scrub in the 1980s always showed promise but rarely demonstrated brilliance"

Why one might ask was he a quote "Domestique" un quote? Because he wasn´t a good rider! If he was a good rider at that time he would have had more responsibility!

On the other hand, LA was drafted into the Motorola team from the outset as team leader and GC contender. He was expected to perform with the assistance of some very experienced and well reputed team mates.[/QUOTE]Maybe Armstrong was going to be a GC contender in the future but he NEVER was never targeting a GC in the TDF pre-cancer!

- Todd Balf Outside magazine. "I'm Not the Next Greg LeMond. I'm the First Lance Armstrong.". July 1994

they announced that Armstrong would start in the Tour de France. Many, including Carmichael, thought he shouldn't ride it—that the impressionable Armstrong, who would be the youngest rider in the field, would overextend himself in the world's most grueling cycling race and possibly put the rest of his season in jeopardy. But Jim Ochowicz wasn't to be swayed; Armstrong was suddenly a hot commodity and gung ho to race.



The hope was that Armstrong would win a stage and then drop out before the difficult climbing legs in the Pyrenees, and amazingly enough that's what happened. He dramatically stole a win in the 114-mile stage from Chalons-sur-Marne to Verdun, coming desperately close to crashing into the course barriers as he outsprinted the rest of the lead pack over the last 50 yards.

"People say because I'm 21 I can't handle this intensity," said a jubilant Armstrong, who had started slowly in the Tour eight days earlier. "But the fact remains that I've felt better every day. Today was the proof." Four days later Ochowicz pulled him out of the race to begin preparations for the World Championships, one month away.

At the age of 21 Indurain dropped out during the 4th stage while Armstrong dropped out in the 12 stage and even won a TDF stage "one of the youngest riders to ever win a TDF stage".

They had the same plan for Armstrong in the 1994 TDF pull him out before the difficult Alps!

- LA June 1996
``The Tour de France is the best preparation for the Olympics,'' says [Lance] Armstrong, a former world champion and Tour stage winner. ``I'm not competing for the overall title this year because of the Olympics. It's truly the hardest race, it's three weeks at the highest level of competition,''


-USA Today. "Armstrong looks ahead to Olympics". July 8th, 1996

Plagued by a persistent cough and what he fears is bronchitis, Armstrong had to stop during the sixth stage of the Tour de France as the weather worsened and the mountains loomed.

``I think I've got bronchitis, and even if the Olympics weren't ..."

How many tumors did he have in his lungs at that time?????????????


The only valid point you may have is when comparing Armstrong and Indurain at 23

LA at 23 in 1995 TDF 1 hr. 28 min. back
MI at 23 in 1987 TDF 2 hr. 53 min. back

Over an hour difference! If Big Mig had a big engine in ´85-´86 he would have at least finished one mountain stage! But he didn´t! Armstrong finished at least 5 if I remember correctly![/QUOTE]