Crazylegs - I said evidence not proof. You admit there is evidence so why attack me?
And despite what you say a lot of the evidence is pretty strong.
Bike Forum
[closed]
Tyler Hamilton dobs Amrstrong in it!
-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
the evidence is inconclusive [you can put a credible case fwd for either position] but at this time he has not been found guilty so he has to be assumed to be innocent..his return certainly showed he was a phenomenal athlete and the winner may have cheated.
I am not sure but nothing a lieing cheat says will convince me one way or the otherPosted 1 year ago # -
We are so obsessed in our fully black vs fully white western mentalities that as soon as some measure of discredit falls on one party then that party can no longer be right in any way shape or form. And that's just nuts. Tyler Hamilton was a doper, and has been caught - that doesn't mean everything he says is a lie!
Posted 1 year ago # -
So anyway, never mind Armstrong, is Tyler's book any good?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Setting aside the doping, which personally I am certain that all the winning riders have been part of, he did of course race on in the Tour 2003 with a broken collarbone - and won a stage in that condition. Hard.
Posted 1 year ago # -
that doesn't mean everything he says is a lie
of course not but it does mean that not everything he says is truePosted 1 year ago # -
i neither no nor care about LA really but if it is so implausable for someont to be better than the others for so long then surely Nico and anne caroline were off their chops on something for most of their careers?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Why can't you just leave Lance Armstrong alone
Posted 1 year ago # -
My issue with all this - is it is much much harder to prove that you are clean.
I personally think that a cleaner cycling is slowly getting there, but it will never be erradicated.
Lance is a good well known target and that is why people go after him - but deep down I don't think he is the mastermind behind all cycle doping which some parties are makign him out to be.
As for who is clean - well people liek certain riders and think that thier own personal heros are good and the others bad. Be it the British riders like Bradly & Geraint - who a lot on the continent think are'nt that squeeky, to the older generations like Greg LeMond even (He who shouts loudest often are ones having something to hide).
I hope they do find real evidence (not hearsay) that a cheater has cheated - which is where the UCI must get thier house in order.
The same must also happen in other sports - athletics is well tested, but look at tennis , football, rugby etc - the federations there are still too keen to cover up issues and point the finger at cyclign (just like Greg Lemond does to Lance in my eyes).
Posted 1 year ago # -
IMO it's more likely that Lance doped than Hamilton is lying
yep, spot on cynic-al
Posted 1 year ago # -
Armstrongs denials are very cleverly worded. Never failed a test, never used illegal substances - well in 1999 there was no test for EPO and I am not sure it was on the banned list.
So if we banned something orange juice tomorrow and went back through old samples and found traces of orange juice then everyone would be a drugs cheat? Whilst I don't agree with the pushing of limits to what is legal/illegal, surely if something wasn't banned then you can hardly implicate someone for actually using it?
Posted 1 year ago # -
thats my point breatheasy.
Posted 1 year ago # -
So if we banned something orange juice tomorrow and went back through old samples and found traces of orange juice then everyone would be a drugs cheat? Whilst I don't agree with the pushing of limits to what is legal/illegal, surely if something wasn't banned then you can hardly implicate someone for actually using it?
If orange juice had a proven positive effect on performance that wouldn't be there for non-orange juice drinkers, yes.
You can't enforce a ban on a performance-enhancing drug for which there is no test available. That doesn't mean that use of the performance-enhancing drug is fair, does it?
Posted 1 year ago # -
He never actually denies taking drugs, he always just says he's never failed a test.
Still means that he was ahead of the game whether it was with substances or not and, knowing that most of the other riders were probably using at the same time, still puts him ahead of the game? I don't agree with cheating, or even trying to find drugs that are not yet banned etc so I'd hate to find out he did, but I find it slightly irritating that a man can't achieve greatness without everyone automatically questioning his honesty and judging him guilty until proven innocent.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I think that it is wrong to say EPO wasn't banned in 1999
here is a definition of doping from the 1960s
"The administration of or use by a competing athlete of any substance foreign to the body or any physiologic substance taken in abnormal quantity or taken by an abnormal route of entry into the body with the sole intention of increasing in an artificial and unfair manner his/her performance in competition. When necessity demands medical treatment with any substance which, because of its nature, dosage, or application is able to boost the athlete's performance in competition in an artificial and unfair manner, this too is regarded as doping.".[
if Armstrong to EPO as a systematic atempt to boost cycling performance he broke the rules as they were then
not geing able to test for something is not the same as being allowed to do it
If you were allowed to take EPO why did Pantani get a 2 week suspension for his red blood cell count (in 1999)?
I think UCI dealt with EPO poorly back then as they admitted they couldn't test for EPO and therefore monitored red blood cell count which didn't carry the coreect messages
so no its not like retrospectively banning orange juice
Posted 1 year ago # -
You can't enforce a ban on a performance-enhancing drug for which there is no test available
Surely you can? Blood testing is not the only way of catching people doing illegal stuff...?
Posted 1 year ago # -
But how would you prove it?
If team X is careful with how much EPO they have with them, and how syringes and empty packs are disposed of, i.e. no one outside the team has any idea that doping is going on in team X, how would you enforce a ban? Team Y says they're doping, and that's all the proof needed?Posted 1 year ago # -
You could still bust them with the stuff on them, using old fashioned detective work like they did the other day.
Not as effective but still possible to do. Might as well add the drug to the list.
Posted 1 year ago # -
EPO was banned but enforcement was difficuilt
but it was banned so if it now turns out that you were using it its reasonable for people to say "you were cheating"
Posted 1 year ago # -
Bjarne Riis admitted using EPO and handed back his 1996 tour win. think Armstrong would do the same?
Posted 1 year ago # -
AND Armstrongs 1999 sample tested positive for Epo IN 2005. One of the bits of evidence - inadmissible for banning purposes tho
Posted 1 year ago # -
having read up on the 2005 testing of the 1999 samples its quite a long fragile train back to Armstrong. If it had really stood up this thread would not be here and Tyler wouldn't have a story...
Posted 1 year ago # -
Ampthill - what I read is very damming indeed. NO doubt the sample were his and no doubt the EPO was in them. Inadmissible for banning tho as it was a part of an academic study sop the protocols were not followed.
http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden
Posted 1 year ago # -
Lets just look at fact instead.
He never got caught
No amount of EPO would make me a tour winner
No amount of EPO would make you a tour winner
No amount of EPO would make David Miller a tour winnerWhat ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Lets just look at fact instead.
He never got caught
No amount of EPO would make me a tour winner
No amount of EPO would make you a tour winner
No amount of EPO would make David Miller a tour winnerWhat ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Don't underestimate the value of drugs. Their use is widespread because they work. There is no way a clean athlete can compete at their level if they're the only one who's clean. They'd simply come last.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Note that Hamilton corroberates the story that Landis told - that Armstrong failed a test during the 2001 Tour of Switzerland, (prior to his "donation" to UCI funds)
Posted 1 year ago # -
If you were allowed to take EPO why did Pantani get a 2 week suspension for his red blood cell count (in 1999)?
EPO was banned but enforcement was difficuilt
EPO was not specifically sanctioned at this time because no established testing procedure was available to identify EPO use. Instead, the authorities introduced suspensions on "health grounds" for riders with haemocrit values exceeding 50%.
When a testing procedure was developed later, EPO use became a doping offence. In practice it appears that offenders stayed one step ahead by using blood doping (transfusions) instead of dosing with EPO, or adopted EPO microdosing techniques to avoid getting picked up by the EPO test.I believe that athletes involved in the Balco doping affair were successfully sanctioned based on circumstantial evidence and paper trails, so I don't think a failed test is necessarily essential to prosecute someone now?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Cadel Evans is clean. A bit nutty but clean.
Posted 1 year ago # -
EPO was banned in 1999, they just didn't have a fail safe test for it. However, if you had heamocrit >50% you were suspended for two weeks on health grounds unless you could show a genetic reason for high haemocrit levels.
1999 was the tour of redemption after the Festina affair in 1998 when loads of drugs including EPO were found in Willy Voets' car. As a result, Festina were kicked off the tour and their riders banned.
LA's postive 1999 "test" arose because as TJ said as part of the academic exercise needed to validate the new test for EPO they went back to a period when they knew EPO use was wide spread and lo and behold a number of samples proved positive. Some smart reporter at Equipe then managed to get the key to the samples from the UCI and cross referred them to the academic exercise. It transpired six of the samples (I think) that were positive belonged to LA.
It should be noted that Hamilton says he gave the same testimony to the Grand Jury a few months ago when he did not have a book out - does that make it more believeable?
Posted 1 year ago # -
If orange juice had a proven positive effect on performance that wouldn't be there for non-orange juice drinkers, yes.
FlyingOx - so if it was found out that person A training harder than person B had a positive effect on performance then by your reasoning they should be banned.
People drinking water will have better performance than non-water drinker. Should we ban water? And hang all cyclists who drank water in 1973?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Thanks TJ thats a good article better than the one I read before
Epo was covered by the genral description of doping in 1999, even if it wasn't tested for...
Posted 1 year ago # -
No amount of EPO would make you a tour winner
I dunno. iDave diet and some EPO, how hard can it be?
Posted 1 year ago # -
you got home safely then?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Yep, see the other thread
Set a new PB too!
Posted 1 year ago # -
I'd echo Crazy Legs comments.
Met him, ridden with him, shot the breeze, nothing but respect for what he had achieved both in cycling but more importantly for the fight against cancer. I could not care less about what Landis or Hamilton have to say. What have they to achieve other than publicity for themselves and a poor attempt to divert from their own misdeeds? When you watch Hamilton, look at his body language when talking about Armstrong and doping. Lots of shaking of the head and lack of eye contact. Hmmmm.
Ultimately, Armstrong's legacy reaches far beyond the confines of bike racing. If he did dope, I just don't care. Whether he did or not, I judge him by what he has done with the Livestrong Foundation and that to me is what counts.
Posted 1 year ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
