What would it take to convince you Armstrong is doping?

[birdman23]

What would it take to convince you Armstrong is doping? This is bound to be interesting. There are so many threads on this forum that ask for proof of innocence when it should be the other way around. There are three things and three things only that would convince me that he is NOT clean.

1. He admits it
2. He tests positive
3. Concrete physical evidence

Until then (which is never in my opinion) he is quite simply a remarkable athlete.

 

[meehs]

What would it take to convince you Armstrong is doping? This is bound to be interesting. There are so many threads on this forum that ask for proof of innocence when it should be the other way around. There are three things and three things only that would convince me that he is NOT clean.

1. He admits it
2. He tests positive
3. Evidence


Until then (which is never in my opinion) he is quite simply a remarkable athlete.

I think you nailed it. The only thing I'd change is that instead of just saying "evidence", I'd refine that to say "concrete physical evidence" for example a load of EPO and syringes in his house or something that. the reason being that if you ask some of the other people on this forum, there is already plenty of "evidence" to show that he's doping. In general I completely agree with what you've said though. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt until one of those three things happens.

 

[birdman23]

I think you nailed it. The only thing I'd change is that instead of just saying "evidence", I'd refine that to say "concrete physical evidence" for example a load of EPO and syringes in his house or something that. the reason being that if you ask some of the other people on this forum, there is already plenty of "evidence" to show that he's doping. In general I completely agree with what you've said though. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt until one of those three things happens.

Very good point Meehs. I actually went back and changed my original post to reflect concrete evidence. Thanks for pointing that out. By the way, thanks to the admins of this site for putting the edit feature back to the way it was.

 

[run_and_ride]

What would it take to convince you Armstrong is doping? This is bound to be interesting. There are so many threads on this forum that ask for proof of innocence when it should be the other way around. There are three things and three things only that would convince me that he is NOT clean.

1. He admits it
2. He tests positive
3. Concrete physical evidence

Until then (which is never in my opinion) he is quite simply a remarkable athlete.

I am already convinced he has doped, although I cannot say one way or another whether he is currently doping.

However, I think Lance fans (which I readily admit I am no longer one of) would only accept #1.

In my mind, Lance has already laid the groundwork that he could be easily set up. And maybe he is right. First it was the French reporters supposedly trying to get into his room and his statement that if they didn't find anything they could plant something and then his statement about having something thrown at him that went in his mouth and could have been laced with something.

I also wanted to add that unless Lance's doctor friend has found some magical drug, his superior performance cannot be explained away by doping allegations. He is simply the strongest cyclist in the world. I don't care for him anymore, but I do have to admit that as some other seem unwilling to admit.

 

[birdman23]

his statement that if they didn't find anything they could plant something and then his statement about having something thrown at him that went in his mouth and could have been laced with something.

What and when was this statement? That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

 

[run_and_ride]

What and when was this statement? That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

Ridiculous because you don't believe he made them and you are questioning me or ridiculous because you believe he made them and think they are a stretch?

I read both of them and will see if I can find them. Then we will see if it still the most ridiculous thing you have ever heard.

 

[run_and_ride]

What and when was this statement? That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

Here is a link to an article where he said that he could easily be framed:

http://sport.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=918&id=812282004

I am still searching for the other. I only read that once. I have read about him saying that the French Reporters could plant something in his room more as that was more widely reported.

 

[si2k2000]

Well I may be totally wrong (feel free to flame or correct me if I am) but if he was taking EPO before it was traceable then surely he wouldnt be taking it anymore, since they can detect it now. So if he had stopped taking it then this tour he would have been clean and this was one of his biggest margins of vistory then surely this proves he has been clean all along.

Thats what I think from my limited knowledge but feel free to correct me.

 

[birdman23]

Here is a link to an article where he said that he could easily be framed:

http://sport.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=918&id=812282004

I am still searching for the other. I only read that once. I have read about him saying that the French Reporters could plant something in his room more as that was more widely reported.

I know all about the framing situation, The one I was questioning was the "thrown object". If Lance did indeed say that I would say it is absolutely stupid. I just like to see sources for information.

 

[si2k2000]

I know all about the framing situation, The one I was questioning was the "thrown object". If Lance did indeed say that I would say it is absolutely stupid. I just like to see sources for information.

Yea being an LA fan I read the vast majority of the stuff he says in interviews but I have never read this. This does a seem rather strange thing for LA to say. So I would like to see the source as well.

 

[keydates]

All/most of his (current) teammates either test positive or confess that Armstrong is doping. If all of his teammates are doping, it's highly likely that he is too.

 

[Beastt]

All/most of his (current) teammates either test positive or confess that Armstrong is doping. If all of his teammates are doping, it's highly likely that he is too.

That's a highly inflammatory, open, unbacked and rather bold comment. Might you want to toss in something to substantiate that? I've heard a comment that "a teammate" said that Lance was doping, but when the poster was challenged to present a name, an article, a reference... anything, they fell silent.

Are you saying that the USPS team tested positive but the officials let them race anyway? If so, I think it appropriate that you offer something besides your unsubstantiated, unsupported comment.

 

[JTEK]

That's a highly inflammatory, open, unbacked and rather bold comment. Might you want to toss in something to substantiate that? I've heard a comment that "a teammate" said that Lance was doping, but when the poster was challenged to present a name, an article, a reference... anything, they fell silent.

Are you saying that the USPS team tested positive but the officials let them race anyway? If so, I think it appropriate that you offer something besides your unsubstantiated, unsupported comment.

Wait you forgot a part... no nevermind, you covered that, but what about... no, you got that too... but, hm... I don't think you could have said it any more perfect!

 

[Claes]

A couple of things make me think he COULD be a cheater.
1. Before having testicular cancer I think he finished the tour once on 56th spot or something, did not finish three or four times. Then he has cancer comes back and wins on first attempt? Can someone explain what happend between his race in 1996 and did not finish, and 1999 when he wins?

2. The USAs tendency to not let the world agencies know when they catch someone doped. Just look at the sprinters or actually the whole track and field team.

3. He works with doctor, is it Ferrari?, that does not have a totally clean background

I read of an american guy, cyclist not pro, that tried Human growth hormone, EPO and then some, and the benefits he got was enormous.

Lance have been beating people that DID cheat. So, that to me is another indication on that he was too. If someone is EPOing for the whole tour, I really do not believe that Lance would beat them, unless he did to. I would be surprised if not pretty much all of the top cyclist in TDF are cheating.

Not sure what the substance is today that they do not detect but it is probably some medicin for dogs or rats.

Now, flame away.

 

[maxxevv]

A couple of things make me think he COULD be a cheater.
1. Before having testicular cancer I think he finished the tour once on 56th spot or something, did not finish three or four times. Then he has cancer comes back and wins on first attempt? Can someone explain what happend between his race in 1996 and did not finish, and 1999 when he wins?

2. The USAs tendency to not let the world agencies know when they catch someone doped. Just look at the sprinters or actually the whole track and field team.

3. He works with doctor, is it Ferrari?, that does not have a totally clean background

I read of an american guy, cyclist not pro, that tried Human growth hormone, EPO and then some, and the benefits he got was enormous.

Lance have been beating people that DID cheat. So, that to me is another indication on that he was too. If someone is EPOing for the whole tour, I really do not believe that Lance would beat them, unless he did to. I would be surprised if not pretty much all of the top cyclist in TDF are cheating.

Not sure what the substance is today that they do not detect but it is probably some medicin for dogs or rats.

Now, flame away.

Thats rather interesting a conjuncture.

Its like saying in a written examination, a fella cheats to get the necessary marks for an 'A', but another student comes along and got a 'Distinction'... So this second student must be cheating too ???

In the context of the exam, likewise in cycling, usually the need to cheat arises because the person in question cannot perform at the highest levels and just wants a 'short-cut' route to success. But usually, the top fellas are so good in what they do, they still score their aces no matter how well the others do....

So.... your top graduate from college was a cheat all along, because some other student who barely managed to get a 'B' grade cheated in his/her exams and to beat these cheats, he/she must have cheated too ??

You've got be kidding here .....

 

[tamman2000]

1. Before having testicular cancer I think he finished the tour once on 56th spot or something, did not finish three or four times. Then he has cancer comes back and wins on first attempt? Can someone explain what happend between his race in 1996 and did not finish, and 1999 when he wins?

He drasticly changes his technique and goals during the time he was out for treatment. (grinding -> dancing, sprinter -> GC)
Also having cancer can really change you motivation in all aspects of life, Lance didn't work very hard until after the cancer. After cancer he is possibly the most devoted man in cycling.

These differences can easily explain the improvment.

I read of an american guy, cyclist not pro, that tried Human growth hormone, EPO and then some, and the benefits he got was enormous.

Have you read what David Miller has to say about the benifits of EPO? The jist of it is: EPO can help, but the difference between Lance and everyone else is more than can be explained by EPO.

 

[Beastt]

What would it take to convince you Armstrong is doping?

Evidence - real evidence. The kind of "beyond a reasonable doubt" evidence that us supposed to be required in the American court system. Anything less equals innocence.

This idea that if you win, the fact that others are doping means you must be doping too, doesn't hold up against even moderate scrutiny. Did David Millar win the Tour de France? How many stages did he win? Did Richard Virenque win the Tour de France? Did he even come close? Doping might give you an edge but it doesn't make you super-human. Why is it that Richard Virenque has a history of doping, is the first rider ever to win 7 King of the Mountains titles, and yet no one is pointing a finger at him? To me this looks suspiciously like a witch hunt for those who don't like Lance.

 

[JohnO]

He drasticly changes his technique and goals during the time he was out for treatment. (grinding -> dancing, sprinter -> GC)
Also having cancer can really change you motivation in all aspects of life, Lance didn't work very hard until after the cancer. After cancer he is possibly the most devoted man in cycling.

These differences can easily explain the improvment.

Have you read what David Miller has to say about the benifits of EPO? The jist of it is: EPO can help, but the difference between Lance and everyone else is more than can be explained by EPO.

Lance also got older. It's pretty well established that the ideal age for Tour competition is late 20's. Younger than that, and most people have neither the stamina or the tactical knowledge to be an effective stage racer.

A lot of riders have done the same. What was Basso's record before this year?

 

[Beastt]

A couple of things make me think he COULD be a cheater.
1. Before having testicular cancer I think he finished the tour once on 56th spot or something, did not finish three or four times. Then he has cancer comes back and wins on first attempt? Can someone explain what happend between his race in 1996 and did not finish, and 1999 when he wins?

Cancer happened. He came back 20 pounds lighter (upper body), with a different mental focus, older, wiser and more willing to listen to his trainer.
(Yes, I see your "COULD" and I understand that you're only saying you understand how one might suspect doping.)

2. The USAs tendency to not let the world agencies know when they catch someone doped. Just look at the sprinters or actually the whole track and field team.

I believe Lance has been tested regularly by the UCI which is not American. His tests have all been negative.

3. He works with doctor, is it Ferrari?, that does not have a totally clean background

To the best of my knowledge, there hasn't been any conviction. The whole thing hasn't been to trial yet, has it? As I understand it, there are allegations but nothing more at this point in time.

 

[mike7382]

id have to say when he tests positive to epo then ill believe it. until then he hasnt done it in my book.