Lance Armstrong

Disappointed but not all that surprised really. In that era where almost everyone was at it for one guy to win consistently without doping was very hard to believe.

As for the comments on him never being caught, two points really.

The use of the word 'sophisticated' is key, its well known that it was (and to a certain extent still is) possible to blood dope in ways which were (are) completely undetectable. Simply they were very good at it, the ones that got caught were just not as good. Plus half the time others got caught wasn't from tests but catching team doctors/team members with the drugs/paraphernalia. Not to mention payments to UCI and allegations of tip offs for testing times etc.

Secondly retrospective testing of blood, from his return especially, have proven doping as far as I am aware. I haven't read the report but just going from quotes such as: "His blood values in his valedictory 2009 and 2010 Tours, state an expert, had "less than a one in a million chance" of being natural."

I will admit I was never a huge fan of Armstrongs, but I respect a lot of what he has done. I am sitting with a Livestrong band on my arm as I type. Like any sporting matter a lot of opinion will come down to how much you liked the guy/team in the first place. So just my two cents, no offence caused hopefully!...

[Bri w]

1999
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Alex Zülle (‘98 busted for EPO)
3. Fernando Escartín (Systematic team doping exposed in ‘04)
4. Laurent Dufaux (‘98 busted for EPO)
5. Ángel Casero (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

2000
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Christophe Moraue (‘98 busted for EPO)
5. Roberto Heras (‘05 busted for EPO)

2001
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Andrei Kivilev
5. Igor González de Galdeano (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

2002
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Raimondas Rumšas (Suspended in ‘03 for doping)
4. Santiago Botero (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Igor González de Galdeano (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

2003
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Alexander Vinokourov (Suspended in ‘07 for CERA)
4. Tyler Hamilton (Suspended ‘04 for blood doping)
5. Haimar Zubeldia

2004
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Andreas Kloden (Named in doping case in ‘08
3. Ivan Basso (Suspended in ‘07 for Operacion Puerto ties)
4. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Jose Azevedo (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

2005
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Ivan Basso (Suspended in ‘07 for Operacion Puerto ties)
3. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Fransico Mancebo (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Alexander Vinokourov (Suspended in ‘07 for CERA)

So if Alex Zulle was busted for EPO, so it was obviously discoverable in a test, how come LA wasn't busted once in over 500 test covering xx years. Some of those test were totally at random, i.e. someone knocked on his door at home... And there's a bunch of guys who've got insignificant bans and their race results overturned for their testimony. Now you have the US Anti doping Agency telling the UCI to strip LA of his titles.

Maybe he is guilty but it should be proved with scientific evidence from the samples they've been storing for years, not some 'bought' testimony of proven cheats...

[maviczap]

Originally Posted by Luckypants

Personally I am very disappointed. I always defended Armstrong because he was never caught and cycling is the most tested sport on the planet. He was a sporting hero of mine.

The only thing you can say now is, during the 90's and early 00's everyone was at it, so maybe the playing field was level. They either scrap all race results from that era or write those times off as 'The Doping Years'.

Saddened.

Yes, its a black day for cycling. I agree they were the doping years

Originally Posted by Berlin

Innocent until proven guilty.. and they haven't... so he isn't.

The guy has taken more drug tests than any other sportsman alive.. and never had a positive test result....

Simples!

C

Not until recently was there a reliable test for EPO, once there was the dopers had moved on to blood transfusions, which up until recently were also hard to detect. So Lance amongst others using EPO would not have tested positive. The only clue to the use of EPO was an increased Heamocrit level.

Allegedly Armstrong tested positive twice, but this was covered up. Most notablely at the Tour Du Swiss.

Originally Posted by Supervox

I'm not sure what your reasoning for this - it's the US Anti-Doping Agency that's been investigating him NOT the French !!

Good point

Originally Posted by Bri w

So if Alex Zulle was busted for EPO, so it was obviously discoverable in a test, how come LA wasn't busted once in over 500 test covering xx years. Some of those test were totally at random, i.e. someone knocked on his door at home... And there's a bunch of guys who've got insignificant bans and their race results overturned for their testimony. Now you have the US Anti doping Agency telling the UCI to strip LA of his titles.

Maybe he is guilty but it should be proved with scientific evidence from the samples they've been storing for years, not some 'bought' testimony of proven cheats...

Zuelle didn't test positive, he admitted to using EPO along with most of his Festina team mates, after the team car was caught at the French border with hundreds of vials of EPO. The reliable test for EPO didn't exist until after the Sydney Olympics in 2000. Once that cat was out of the bag then the blood doping took over.

Originally Posted by monkey

If the proof is other peoples testimony that they all used drugs did any of them get tested positive?

Yes, Tyler Hamilton did test positive for EPO, but only once the test for EPO was found, which was just after he'd won his Olympic title

Originally Posted by arc123

Do you believe it's any different now?

Yes, but I won't be naive enough to say that no one dopes & no one will ever dope again.

At the peak of the EPO years, Pantani climbed Alpe D'Huez in a record 37 mins, its never been beaten, and never will be.

Since then as more and more dopers have been taken out, the crazy average speeds that the peleton used to be able to race at have also fallen, to the levels before EPO & blood transfusions took over.

I've been following cycling avidly since 1986, so I've witnessed the changes to the way the peleton rides. The EPO years started in about 1994 - 95 when the Gweiss Ballan team started to dominate the single day races, their team doctor was Armstrong's doctor, Dr Ferrari. Bjarn Riis (who was at Gweiss Ballan) won Tour De France 1996, using by his own admission EPO to beat Miguel Indurain, the last 'clean' winner IMO before the EPO & blood transfusion years.

Wiggins, Frome and all the SKY riders I believe are riding clean, plus many more in the peleton. The testing authorities will always be playing catch up, as the cheats find other products to boost their performance. No one rides away like they used to be able to do after an injection of EPO or a bag of fresh blood, if they do they stick out like a sore thumb, and attract the attention of the testers.

I've read some of Tyler Hamiltons book and the evidence is damning to say the least, so I'd say read that, plus I'd like to read the US anti doping's 1000 page document. In a court of law I think Armstrong wouldn't stand a chance in cross examination, all he say was I never tested positive.

Riding clean... Or using a different drug?

[maviczap]

Originally Posted by Spank86

Riding clean... Or using a different drug?

Riding clean

Glad to hear it, are they faster than the last year we suspect theres a possibility the winner was riding clean before all the drug allegations?

[maviczap]

The average speed of the peleton has dropped

Which suggests that a bigger % are clean, it doesn't tell us what % though.

[maviczap]

Yes, but they'll probably never be able to tell you that, but a much larger majority than before.

I'd suggest starting with the times of the winners pre doping and comparing them to now.

If there is such a thing as pre doping.