The suspicions are still around and he seems to have a relationship withthe Balco of cycling.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash9.htm

He's been tested time and time again and always passes. When anyone has come out and directly accused of him of doping he has immediately sued them for libel or slander. Only Lance knows for sure I suppose, but I'd give an answer an empatic NO.

quote:

---

He's been tested time and time again and always passes. When anyone has come out and directly accused of him of doping he has immediately sued them for libel or slander.

---

Yeah, but if I had a performance-enhancing substance that didn't show up on the tests they're currently using, I would probably employ a similar tactic. I really makes people think twice about sticking their noses into the matter.

FWIW, my guess is that he's legitimately clean.

I have a hard time believing that a cancer survivor would take something that's known to have the potential side effects that many steroids and performance-enhancing drugs can have. That doesn't mean he doesn't, though.

-------------------------------------------------------------------


"When I look to this lion it looks arrogant, it is aggressive, it is powerful. He is proud of being a Chelsea lion." -- José Mourinho

I agree. Since cancer, he's so protective of his body that it's almost (almost) unthinkable that he would tarnish it like that. Even so, the prevalence of doping in cycling and other endurance sports like the Ironman casts suspicion on everyone. I believe him though.

"Someone asked me, 'why is Armstrong and his team superior to all the others?'. I said, 'because they've got the recipe that works'.

A magic formula is the answer? This guy is upset because his "Fan Club" jerseys are now found in the bargain bin on cycling websites. Between him and Gilberto Simeoni there is enough whine to flood California. Heaven forbid someone ride 350 days out of the year to win one race.

Besides, claiming that there is some sort of concoction that is "undetectable" and leaving it at that is complete crap. If he knows there is some sort of formula that is undetectable, then surely he most know at least a little as to the composition, but he doesn't address that at all. Hell, if anyone wanted to accuse an athlete without any actual evidence...just say he has a "secret, super-duper" formula. The accusation covers because if anyone questions you, all you have to say is "Hey, I said it was secret! How should I know how he does it?" but yet they still know it's 'secret'? Give me a break.

For one athlete to be as dominant as he's been in the sport of cycling there's one of two things, or possibly both, happening. Either the field of competitors in cycling is extremely weak or he's juicing. No athlete, in a sport that relies so much on athleticism and not skill, is able to stay at such a high level of competitiveness.

Look at track athletes there's so much turnover in the winners each event, and if there's not usually you find out that the athlete sustaining their ability to win is on steriods. This isn't even taking into account that these athletes are focusing on a single distance, whereas on the Tour de France you have to have strength, speed, and endurance.

I just can't imagine him winning without some sort of performance enhancing drugs.

His body was completely changed due to the cancer. He was more or less able to start re-shaping his entire cardio system as he began training again, as well as rebuild almost all of his muscle. His heart can pump 9 gallons of blood per minute whereas the average heart can pump 5. He has a VO2 max that is insane, and his body only produces something like half of the lactic acid compared to that of the average body. These are the reasons he is so good and has been for so long in such a consistent fashion.

He is also tested in such an obscene fashion that he would have been caught. The doping officials "randomly" test him way more often that any other cyclist. They wake him up at his home in Austin and force him to pee in a cup while he is eating breakfast because they are so desperate to catch him.

Why can nobody just except that he is a dominant figure in his sport? He trains hard and trains a lot. Jordan was so clutch for so long. Tiger was (and might be again here). Well, when it comes to le Tour, so is Lance. He has said it before...the Tour is what got him up in the morning. The thought of losing it. The thought of Ullrich beating him in a time trial, or so Spanish climber taking off in the Pyranees. That is why he was so good. He had the edge and could put himself in that zone.

[This message has been edited by thriller03 (edited 7/26/2005 7:33a).]

dubag: Either the field of competitors in cycling is extremely weak or he's juicing.

Then how come the old school baseball guys like Babe Ruth used to play hung over and fat and still dominate?

dubag: No athlete, in a sport that relies so much on athleticism and not skill, is able to stay at such a high level of competitiveness.

There is skill to racing. See also Babe Ruth example.

dubag: I just can't imagine him winning without some sort of performance enhancing drugs.

A great example of what you are saying happend a few years ago. After Big L won #3 he was doing this interview in Austin at Chuy's. During the interview his cell phone rang. It was British bike racer David Millar who was drunk and having a GREAT time. He asked Lance what he was up to. Lance said doing an interview between training rides. Millar cannot believe Lance is doing training rides for the next TDF in September! Millar says he has not been on the bike in weeks. Currently Millar is serving a 2 year suspension for doping.

The competition used to take the winter off.
Lance has taken the philosophy of many US athletes that their sport is a year round occupation. Ever read about Jerry Rice's workouts? How about the workouts George Foreman did to get into shape to win the heavyweight title in his 40's? Lance is probobly the most tested athlete on the planet and has never tested positive. The best excuse to this is that he has a "magic formula" to mask it? Come on.

Jordan and Tiger are subject to completely different rules when talking about why they're so dominant. They play sports that require a mastery of different skills. Lance has to have the endurance, speed and strength to pedal a bike through mountains. That doesn't require years of mastery of certain skills. That's why I compare it to track athletes. It would be like some guy winning the decathalon(speed, strength, and endurance) 7 years in a row. If it happens it's one of two things, the competition isn't that great or he's on some sort of hardcore preformance enhancing drugs.

quote:

---

doesn't require years of mastery of certain skills.

---

You obviously don't know much about competitive cycling.

Lance is tested year round. I think I see your point but I don't think you know what you are talking about in regard to professional cycling. Matter of fact Lance had to take a drug test the moment he got off the bike after winning the final time trial in Stage 20.

Actually, mastering the bike can make all the difference. As a cyclist I have been beaten hard on a ride by a roommate who was in much worse shape than me simply because he had been on the cycling team before and knew how to manage his bike, gears, posture, etc. Have you paid attention to the extremely technical descents they ride on (at more than 60 km/hr in some instances). Or the way they are able to handle their bikes in a bunch sprint with 198 other riders?

Lance's mastery of his bike is no different than Tiger mastering his golf swing. It takes different skills, but that is why Lance isnt wearing a green jacket and Tiger will never wear the yellow jerzey.

Obviously there's some skills you have to master, but it's not like the bulk of your performance is due to those skills. Here's an example, a cyclist has to learn how to be more aerodynamic and use his energy efficiently. If you took those skills away from a cyclist he might add a few seconds to his time. If you took away a soccer players ability to dribble, shoot and pass or a basketball players ability to do those things they wouldn't even be considered a soccer player or basketball player anymore. People on here have completely turned what I've said into something other than the original topic. When I was explaining the difference between Jordan and Armstrong being dominant I was explaining that one sport(basketball) is more reliant on their skills than their physicality. The reason I'm saying Armstrong is juicing is because an athlete in a sport that depends on physicality can't sustain that high level for a long(many years) amount of time. Think track & field or cross country running might be a better comparison.

The bulk of your PERFORMANCE does depend on those things. If you cant manage your energy, you wont PERFORM well. You wont be considered a cyclist, you will be a guy on a bike...much like a soccer player who cant dribble will be a guy with a soccer ball.

You assume there could never be an athlete like Lance. Why cant there be one person comes along who revolutionizes his/her sport? Cyclists (big names on big budget teams) get caught all the time. Yet Lance still ALWAYS tests negative. Why is it so impossible that the dude is simply a ridiculous athlete who completely understands his body and how to control it to excel at his sport?

If Lance weren't around, I wonder if this same conversation would happen for Jan Ullrich. He's been right behind Lance all these years and you don't see him being accused of doping.

Lance, Jan, and even Basso probably have very similar physiological traits. What sets Lance apart is how meticuless he is with training. It's a science to him. "Mr. Millimeter" is what they call him. He measures everything. Everything. That's where he gets the edge on beating these guys.

Other cyclists on big budget teams don't have the resources that Lance has, which would make it easier for Lance to not get caught. I can't believe some of you are so blind to this. I can't prove to you that he is on drugs and you can't prove to me that he isn't. In my mind I will always believe that he was on them. Anyways it's been fun but these arguements where no one will make any progress toward a resolution get boring to me. I'm out.

The thing is, my argument has seven years of negative test results to back it up, and your's has the stubborness of thinking an endurance athlete cannot be great without drugs. No proof, just an opinion. To each his own.

Good talk.

He has been tested more than any other cyclist. Not even close. If he was doping he would have been caught.

quote:

---

Other cyclists on big budget teams don't have the resources that Lance has,

---

At least four or five other teams, had a budget just as large or larger than Discovery.

quote:

---

Obviously there's some skills you have to master, but it's not like the bulk of your performance is due to those skills.

---

The only thing we can conclude from the above statement is that you know absolutely nothing about the sport.

DaveAg: If Lance weren't around, I wonder if this same conversation would happen for Jan Ullrich.

He did test positive for "X" once.

Jan did test positive

And Jan is not always second, he has been anywhere from 2nd to 4th behind Lance

quote:

---

Does Lance Juice

---

well he still has one nut left, so yes he can juice. just ask sheryl crow

i don't claim to know as much about cycling as dubag or anything, but i would imagine that if you took away lance's ability to manage his bike he would lose precious seconds each stage. after 21 stages, these seconds would add up, and he would LOSE. so yes i would think that his mastery of the bike does provide him the ability to win year in and year out.

C’mon doping is one of the most precise sciences. For example, in the Olympics, an athlete can find a doctor -- and the Dutch are known for this -- to test what level his testosterone and then prescribe the exact amount to still be under the generous Olympic standard for a positive test.

And in cycling where the drugs are more sophisticated and the tests less precise...I don't see how anyone can at least entertain the thought he's doping.

Only in body building is there more drug abuse.

The question I keep asking people is . . . where is all the fuss about Miguel Indurain? He won 5 tours in a row by an average margin of 4 min 40 sec (Lance's avg was about 5.40 and Eddy Merckx almost 12 min!).

MI was physiologically superior to the competition in his prime - his resting heart rate was 28 and cardiac output about 50 L/min for instance. Lance is also physiologically superior to his competitors.

Lance has been winning since he was a kid. He was a US National Junior team member and signed with Subaru/Montgomery while still 18 (i think).

the UCI tests for EVERYTHING. often after testing (between 2 and 5 riders depending on the event at every international level race) the results are not known for up to a month - most times in two weeks depending on the event. the UCI updates its list of banned substances AND methods often. i remember the list when i first started with cycling in 92 - now the list is friggin' huge in comparison.

no joke about testing anytime and anywhere. one of the riders around here is a track national champion and record holder in a couple of masters events - and she has been tested once a month for over a year. she hates the intrusion, but she is careful in what she eats and what medicines she takes. a rider at the Internatinal Tour d'Toona this year was having breathing problems. her coached asked if she wanted to use an inhaler. she declined and said she would rather drop out of the race than to take the chance of being the random selection of the stage for drug testing.

yes, Lance and other professionals are fit and great endurance athletes. however, the skill needed to do what they do is tremendous. try riding with over 100 cyclists in a pack riding at 28 mph. it takes lots of skill. how about descending a mountain at over 50mph? or sprinting at over 35mph? i deal with upgrading riders here in NC/SC and part of whether or not riders can go up to the next level of racing depends not only on their results (endurance), but also on whether or not they are skilled enough to compete at a higher level. a pure time trialist is a scary rider in a field.

so . . . to answer the question . . . No, he does not juice.

>>In my mind I will always believe that he was on them.<<

This is all you need to know about dubag. He won't listen to any evidence, ever. His mind is made up, in spite of the fact that there have been numerous arguments presented here debunking his view.

That, my friends, is the definition of close mindedness. I don't want to get personal, but to me, it is also a symptom of some problem dubag himself has. Its an emotional attachment to a point of view that could never be dissuaded by anything, even the truth. It would be embarrasing to me to hold such a view and actually spout it on a public forum, but to each his own.

[This message has been edited by 91AggieLawyer (edited 8/18/2005 5:04p).]

quote:

---

Lance has taken the philosophy of many US athletes that their sport is a year round occupation.

---

I remember reading an aricle on the BBCSport website last year that described how Lance has brought a new training attitude to the Tour. They described it as a "European" vs "American" attitude of training not so much to "compete" but to "win". They talked about how he prepared for the course, trained on the same mountain stages he would face, trained year round, and said he did these things far more than any other competitor.

Listen, there is as much factual evidence to support Lance's claim that he isn't juicing as there is in arguing Marion Jones didn't juice in the 2000 Olympics and beyond. But did it happen? Yes.

On this subject I am close minded. Sorry that's just the way it is and if you want to relate my having an opinion about something that is very insignificant in my life to having a problem then go ahead.

I just think you are looking at this too much like a lawyer in that he's innocent until proven guilty. I'm not in a jury. I'm just a man on the street with an opinion.

wow, some people are ignorant. there's no way he'd get away if he was doping up.

www.datia.org/resources/USADA.htm

www.usantidoping.org/what/process/analysis.html

www.usantidoping.org/what/stats/history.aspx the last two years have been at the Tour de Georgia (4 & 2) and one other race.

www.uci.ch/imgArchive/Rules/14ant-E.pdf

just some light reading.

>>I just think you are looking at this too much like a lawyer in that he's innocent until proven guilty.<<

No, I'm looking at it from the standpoint of a rational human being who hasn't seen ANY evidence that he's juicing and have seen a TON that he isn't.

I can tell you that from both a legal and non-legal standpoint, you can get yourself into a buttload of trouble depending on conjecture, speculation, innuendo, and supposition. And NOTHING you've said even rises to the level of any of those terms.