Author Topic: Bye Lance (Read 288086 times)

JBB · « **Reply #1975 on:** 29 January, 2015, 10:09:22 pm »

Quote from: torslanda on 28 January, 2015, 11:35:13 am

As one who watched in awe after 'that look' on Hautacam and one who believed what turned out to be the hype, I have defended L A in the past.

I based my belief in the premise that having endured platinum based chaemotherapy and being somewhat aware of what he was capable of doing to his body, he wouldn't adulterate it with substances that could cause him further harm. Remember - EPO use was so widespread by the time of the Festina debacle that riders had to get up and jump around several times a night because their blood was so thick that more than one or two failed to wake up.

Well that turned out to be a load of old bollocks . . .

I had some sympathy when he was diagnosed with testicular cancer and given the prognosis was amazed by his recovery. That sympathy faded considerably when I read or heard that the cancer was attributable to previous steroid abuse.

My 'about face' is complete. There is no way I could ever dream of emulating his riding ability. You could give me all the performance advantages in the world, it wouldn't make a scrap of difference, I never WANTED to do what he did. I enjoyed watching him do it, up the Ventoux with Pantani, the cyclo cross after Beloki fell, The Alpe d'Huez time trial - but not any more.

He doesn't need a PR team or a spokesman. He needs to Foxtrot Romeo Oscar after facing the music and we should never hear from him again.

And like that <pffffttt> He's gone . . .

This .. I couldn't have put it better

Moleman76 · « **Reply #1976 on:** 29 January, 2015, 10:23:33 pm »

Quote from: Flaatuus on 27 January, 2015, 12:08:48 pm

he may also be unwilling to be hypocritical

Lance, unwilling to be hypocritical? Mr. "I've been tested more than anyone else and I am clean*" Armstrong, that guy?

* "because I paid off the UCI when my sources there said there were questionable results?"

LittleWheelsandBig · « **Reply #1977 on:** 29 January, 2015, 11:10:08 pm »

Flaatuus, check your facts. There were tests for administered EPO before 2000, just not ratified for dope testing because of the authorities waiting for Ferrari. That was a good plan!

Bledlow · « **Reply #1978 on:** 30 January, 2015, 12:10:04 am »

Quote from: LittleWheelsandBig on 29 January, 2015, 07:16:48 am

I look forward to bike races where the leaders scatter tacks behind them, hook their opponents into the hedges, have their fans mug their opponents in a quiet part of the course and themselves hitch lifts to near the finish line. All good entertainment (the crowd need somebody in a black hat) and the first person across the line wins. That is all that counts.

Ah, the good old days!

Don't you regret the cameras covering everyone, so it's no longer possible to hop on a train to get ahead of the rest?

Hot Flatus · « **Reply #1979 on:** 30 January, 2015, 05:48:55 am »

Quote from: LittleWheelsandBig on 29 January, 2015, 11:10:08 pm

Flaatuus, check your facts. There were tests for administered EPO before 2000, just not ratified for dope testing because of the authorities waiting for Ferrari. That was a good plan!

Can you provide some evidence for this claim?

To my knowledge Ferrari had no part in developing the test to detect EPO. It was the French national antidoping laboratory (LNDD), and of course ratified by Wada. Unratified tests are irrelevant.

It was Ferrari who developed ways to beat the test.

LittleWheelsandBig · « **Reply #1980 on:** 30 January, 2015, 06:59:00 am »

Yep, I was wrong. Not Ferrari, it was Conconi.

EDIT: Ferrari worked with Conconi while Conconi was doping cyclists (selling EPO to them) and himself with EPO provided by CONI to develop and ratify a EPO test. Paid by both sides - that is how you make a profit.

LEE · « **Reply #1981 on:** 30 January, 2015, 02:01:50 pm »

Kenyan Rita Jeptoo, winner of the Boston and Chicago marathons for the last two years, has been banned from the sport for two years after failing a drugs test, Athletics Kenya said on Friday

Probably another hero to a lot of people.

Tip of the iceberg I imagine. She was probably just "levelling the playing field".

P Walsh · « **Reply #1982 on:** 30 January, 2015, 03:03:34 pm »

It's a risky business having a sports person as a hero. They have a way of letting you down.

citoyen · « **Reply #1983 on:** 30 January, 2015, 03:06:31 pm »

Except Greg Lemond.

trekker12 · « **Reply #1984 on:** 30 January, 2015, 03:13:50 pm »

I struggle with this.

I was a Lance fan, I believed the 'new' image of the sport after the Festina affair. I knew drugs had been prevalent throughout the history of the sport. I loved and still love the drama and spectacle of the Grand Tours and the Belgian classics.

When I had enough money to buy a new bike and get back into cycling in 2007 I was in the shop and had a choice of Specialized or Trek. Having done no research and with money burning a hole in my pocket I went for a (very short) test ride of both bikes and chose the Trek, why? Lance Armstrong. I'd heard of Trek, I'd watched him race on one, I had a photograph of George Hincapie astride a specially painted one in his national champions jersey when the Tour of Britain came to my university town of Swansea in early 2000s (ish).

I wasn't upset or shocked when WADA released their findings. I knew the game was up and he couldn't be defended any more, I've read the books (except any of his for some reason). I don't think I was naïve before when watching them race but others can judge me for all I care.

Should he be punished, yes. Should he race again, no. There are others who took drugs, there are worse cases than his. Unfortunately he took it too far, he bullied and altered many peoples careers and lives. That cannot be excused. He also looked into the TV camera and lied to me.

I have been quizzed by Mrs Trekker since all this happened - I've got her watching bike racing - and I don't believe the sport is currently 'clean'. Doping is however, a minority and not systematically endorsed by teams or sponsors (I have my doubts about one team) and blind eyes being turned on occasion at all levels of the sport. There will always be bad apples in any sport or those who feel threatened in making the team next season.

I think the LA affair will ultimately have done good for the sport. In the long term it will have highlighted the reasons why people cheat and that most of us watching want to see a fair fight taking place on our TV screens.

Ultimately I still want to believe and I will continue to do so - cycling is still a wonderful sport to follow.

And I still have the Trek.

rafletcher · « **Reply #1985 on:** 30 January, 2015, 03:23:02 pm »

Quote from: LittleWheelsandBig on 29 January, 2015, 07:16:48 am

I look forward to bike races where the leaders .... hook their opponents into the hedges...

It happens. Well the anecdote was slightly different - the cyclist involved was "bumped" causing him to go over the low bridge parapet into the river below. Not by the leader though, just by someone in the peleton who disliked him.

Mr Larrington · « **Reply #1986 on:** 30 January, 2015, 04:55:09 pm »

The thing that puzzled me was his whinging about not being allowed to enter for e.g. the Boston Marathon even if he was doing it to raise money for charidee.

Look, you daft git, no-one is going to give you money, no matter how good the cause you're espousing. Now shut it, or I'll set Betsy Andreu on you.

Hot Flatus · « **Reply #1987 on:** 30 January, 2015, 05:32:05 pm »

I think you'd be surprised at just how many people would give money to Armstrong.

Séamas M. · « **Reply #1988 on:** 30 January, 2015, 08:21:41 pm »

Quote from: Mr Larrington on 30 January, 2015, 04:55:09 pm

Now shut it, or I'll set Betsy Andreu on you.

I'd pay to see that! ;-)

Jakob · « **Reply #1989 on:** 30 January, 2015, 10:00:04 pm »

Quote from: trekker12 on 30 January, 2015, 03:13:50 pm

I have been quizzed by Mrs Trekker since all this happened - I've got her watching bike racing - and I don't believe the sport is currently 'clean'. Doping is however, a minority and not systematically endorsed by teams or sponsors (I have my doubts about one team) and blind eyes being turned on occasion at all levels of the sport. There will always be bad apples in any sport or those who feel threatened in making the team next season.

I also don't believe that the sport is clean, but I doubt it's only a minority. I do however think it's much harder to dope enough to make a major difference.

LittleWheelsandBig · « **Reply #1990 on:** 31 January, 2015, 07:43:38 am »

Chris Horner might disagree with you. His Vuelta was an absurd result.

Hot Flatus · « **Reply #1991 on:** 31 January, 2015, 07:53:41 am »

....and everybody knows it which is why, even though having just won a grand tour, no decent team would touch him (and even indecent teams like Astana and Saxo wouldn't either)

clifftaylor · « **Reply #1992 on:** 01 February, 2015, 06:31:41 pm »

Quote from: trekker12 on 30 January, 2015, 03:13:50 pm

IShould he be punished, yes. Should he race again, no. There are others who took drugs, there are worse cases than his.

Quote
Worse than his?? Who are you thinking of??

Doping is however, a minority and not systematically endorsed by teams or sponsors (I have my doubts about one team) and blind eyes being turned on occasion at all levels of the sport. There will always be bad apples in any sport or those who feel threatened in making the team next season.
I think the LA affair will ultimately have done good for the sport. In the long term it will have highlighted the reasons why people cheat and that most of us watching want to see a fair fight taking place on our TV screens.

Quote
I still like watching pro cycling, particularly the one day classics - the big tours are a bit over the top (and a three week race is likely to encourage doping).
I think that doping has moved on (breathing Xenon etc), and is still widespread - witness Chris Froome doing comedy motorbike impressions up mountains when he was previously rubbish uphill.....