Forum menu
Contador got caught. Now getting punished, fair enough. Done.
As for the governing bodies covering up for Armstrong I just don't buy it. Most of these governing bodies are European, the first chance they got to discredit an American taking TdF wins it'd be taken.
The conspiricy theories and constant we haven't found anything but are still going to keep looking until we do, approach are a bit strange. How many times can they test the same samples and go over the same ground to find proof they didn't last time through.
I'm pretty sure if EPO was so hard to trace 12 years ago the playing field would have been pretty level for all the top riders rather than the notion that one pro had dedicated enough time and resource to developing new ways to cheat that kept ahead of all the testers.
I'm not certain that he didn't cheat but do think he was an outstanding sportsman who has been tested a hell of a lot without getting convicted of anything.
Why bother with testers anyway - TJ seems to have all the evidence to hand and know who was guilty, how they did it and every other detail possible!!
Steve - its all info in the public domain. read the link about Armstrong and the retrospective testing
As for the governing bodies covering up for Armstrong I just don't buy it. Most of these governing bodies are European, the first chance they got to discredit an American taking TdF wins it'd be taken.
Didn't he also say (and repeated) that the French authorities don't like him? Has done for years which meant he moved/left back to Texas?
If its ever proven that he won his 7 tours with dope then I'll be very upset. The bloke is great, whether you are a fan or not. Single-minded ruthlessness on and off the bike.
If the tests for EPO were unsophisticated in LA's days, then chances are the whole peloton was up to no good. He caned the lot of them. He was also on death's door and riddled with cancer. My hat is off to the guy. His worst crime...Sheryl Crow.
Tehre was no test for EPO when armstrong was winning.
I'm not certain that he didn't cheat but do think he was an outstanding sportsman who has been tested a hell of a lot without getting convicted of anything.
What do you think of Marion Jones?
I do agree that you should lose any results if you show to have doped - as to lifetime ban, is it better having a David Miller back in cycling clean and very anti doping or not ?
Surely he would be an excellent mentor to have ?
I also agree that LA was too good, especially as everyone else around at the time has been busted, but he has never failed a test so the presumption has to be one of innocence, if he fails one - even retrospectively - then take away all his titles and give them to the next "clean" rider.
Could be a very interesting exercise from his early wins ......
Also not sure many other sports would have the balls to chase the winner of their biggest title for drugs - seems very odd the results from Operation Puerto in other sports have never come to light.
Tehre was no test for EPO when armstrong was winning.
They had a haemocrit test. Which measured the constitution of riders blood levels. ie. they tried not to dope [i]too [/i]much.
You only have to look at the ascent time of Alp D'huez to know there was something fishy going on.
[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpe_d%27Huez#Ascent_times ]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpe_d%27Huez#Ascent_times[/url]
the whole peloton was up to no good
I think that's a given.
In those days - the rider with the best response to EPO treatment won the day.
The conspiricy theories and constant we haven't found anything but are still going to keep looking until we do, approach are a bit strange. How many times can they test the same samples and go over the same ground to find proof they didn't last time through.
Except as TJ says, they have found evidence, the only problem is it's old so cannot be used as proof. Read David Walsh's book "From Lance to Landis".
The other thing is to look at LA's rivals at the time. Ullrich, Virenque, Millar, Riise, Pantani, Basso, Landis, Hamilton, Heras, Vinokourov, Valverde, De Luca etc, etc. They were all doping but couldn't beat LA. Is there any chance at all that a clean LA could beat all these other guys who were doping. No.
The UCI began using a urine test for EPO in 2001.There was no test for EPO when armstrong was winning.
Armstrong won the Tour in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005.
[img] 
[/img]
If the tests for EPO were unsophisticated in LA's days, then chances are the whole peloton was up to no good. He caned the lot of them.
I think this is a key point. It seems unlikely that if Armstrong was doping, that he was alone. In that sense the playing field was level.
The other thing is to look at LA's rivals at the time. Ullrich, Virenque, Millar, Riise, Pantani, Basso, Landis, Hamilton, Heras, Vinokourov, Valverde, De Luca etc, etc. They were all doping but couldn't beat LA. Is there any chance at all that a clean LA could beat all these other guys who were doping. No.
Surely that makes him the best if he beat all comers on a level playing field.
We all forget though that this man went through hell on earth, Cancer & Chemo changed his bodyshape from stocky/slightly thick set to lean and more slender. You can also question the pain hes body went through, his naturally high air/lung capacity and the fact a cancer survivor said he'd never take any chemical in his body again after Chemo.
After all winning a bike race isn't the same as beating Cancer. From what I can gather Cancer makes people think about living not about cheating.
The difference is with Marion Jones, she was deeply entrenched in the BALCO affair.
I think that if LA had been naughty that it would have come out. Plenty of doc's that would surely spill the beans on supplying for a decent payday.
Plus, he has rather a long way to fall should it be true. Is it really worth trying to live the lie rather than tell the truth.
I completely disagree with lifetime bans, three strikes and your out, maybe. But a lifetimne ban for your first offence? Millar has turned himself around. I hope anyone calling for a lifetime ban has never done anything wrong in there life.
If its ever proven that he won his 7 tours with dope then I'll be very upset.
no of course he did not cheat ....the man was able to beat superb athletes like Pantani and others who were drug cheating just by his self determination and will to win. By doing this he proved that cheaters did not always win and he single handed removed drugs from the peloton by showing how you could win clean and we have had no incidents since.
Plus, he has rather a long way to fall should it be true. Is it really worth trying to live the lie rather than tell the truth.
you answer your own question deny it and then he doe snot fall so of course it is
I wish he was clean , like i wish there was a god who righted all wrongs but I have as much faith in either being true. He cant even say he never failed a drug test - very clever athlete but sadly unlikely to be clean IMHO.
The difference is with Marion Jones, she was deeply entrenched in the BALCO affair.
Yes - but before that came out, wasn't everybody saying the same about her as some say about Lance? All you're saying here is that Lance managed to keep his more secret - more luck than judgement that his drugs didn't come from somewhere which got exposed like that. Though of course there is actually evidence against him - with the exception of direct testimony possibly more than against Marion.
No difference at all between Lance and Marion in terms of "has been tested a hell of a lot without getting convicted of anything."
I have to admit I was not at all convinced of LA doping at first, but having seen last year's tour and how people were riding when apparently clean, it makes the incredible feats of speed by LA&co look highly suspicious.
So, Contador....
I was wondering if we would talk about him anytime
I think we've now established Contador is a doper though? Boring discussing him.
Doper? No no, he'd personally bought some meat from a Butchers my dear.
Which Butchers?
Oh dear he can't seem to remember
😆
In that sense the playing field was level.
Yes, you have the cyclist who performed best and responded best to EPO.
Not all riders responded equally so treatments were in some ways tailored.
It is amazing though that no one credible has emerged to point the finger at Armstrong. Someone directly involved. I agree that the balance of probabilities says he doped, no question. Some serious omerta going on, though.Yes - but before that came out, wasn't everybody saying the same about her as some say about Lance? All you're saying here is that Lance managed to keep his more secret - more luck than judgement that his drugs didn't come from somewhere which got exposed like that. Though of course there is actually evidence against him - with the exception of direct testimony possibly more than against Marion.No difference at all between Lance and Marion in terms of "has been tested a hell of a lot without getting convicted of anything."
From what I can gather Cancer makes people think about living not about cheating.
Can tou explain what that means, because it makes no sense to me
Plenty of doc's that would surely spill the beans on supplying for a decent payday.
The doctors are more than well paid. Plus if they 'spill the beans' they get bans too, why would they do that?
Didn't he also say (and repeated) that the French authorities don't like him? Has done for years which meant he moved/left back to Texas?
I thought he buggered off to Spain after leaving the South of France (the bit next to the Italian border). At the time it was considered less suspicious to be in Spain rather than Italy for some reason. Course that's changed a bit...
Oh yes that Lab in Spain that was busted and linked to a lot of 'top' Spanish riders that the Spanish authorities didn't follow up....
Patriotic bunch.
Am I correct in reading Contador had just a tiny trace of steroids, verging on undetectable ?
At the time of testing.
Oh yes that Lab in Spain that was busted and linked to a lot of 'top' Spanish riders that the Spanish authorities didn't follow up....Patriotic bunch.
Well, there was this little detail that doping wasn't a crime (it is now), which means the judges had no jurisdiction. But don't let the facts get in the way of a decent conspiracy theory, eh?
warton - Member
From what I can gather Cancer makes people think about living not about cheating.
Can tou explain what that means, because it makes no sense to me
Plenty of doc's that would surely spill the beans on supplying for a decent payday.
The doctors are more than well paid. Plus if they 'spill the beans' they get bans too, why would they do that?[i]
For cash my dear boy, for cash... Might be well paid, but I am sure there would be one willing to "bust the myth" that is LA.
jambalaya - MemberAm I correct in reading Contador had just a tiny trace of steroids, verging on undetectable ?
Along with plasticizers.
Blood transfusion with his own stored blood that he thought was clean but new more sensitive testing found the tiny trace is the likely explanation.
I feel sorry for the winners of this years tour and the olympics, how would you feel about winning when the best isn't racing?
If the "best" had just been done for doping, not a problem really
I am sure they will feel it is just an utter fraud to not be beaten to gold/yellow jersey by a drug cheat .
Along with plasticizers.
Is that an official result?
why ask a question you know the answer to?
re plasticizers- do you have another expanation for their presence?
"Along with plasticizers"
There is no agreed test for the above, mainly because you you would be found positive if you'd wrapped your butties in cling film.
There is no offical test or limit for plasticizers - its a test that is being developed and is awaiting accreditation. It is however apart of the case against contador thats why they wanted Ashendon to give evidence and why contadors team tried to block him
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/10849/Report--WADA-lawyers-unhappy-with-Contador-CAS-hearing.aspx
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/segura-says-contador-plasticizer-levels-are-indicative-of-transfusion
Not true MT - above a certain level transfusion is the only explanation
why ask a question you know the answer to?
re plasticizers- do you have another expanation for their presence?
Because some people keep on bleating on about them, and Armstrong's guilt, as if they were proven facts and not just newspaper reports.
TandemJeremy - Member
Epicyclo - read my link above - thats pretty strong evidence...
It reads more like an interview to me.
It's up to a court to decide if it's credible evidence.
Its one of the worlds top experts on doping giving a detailed analysis and his opinion. It certainly is strong evidence - a court would decide if it were proof.
Mogrim - the plasticisers in Contadors blood being at a level that proves transfusion is a proven fact. Its not accredited for to use as a banning on its own but its a part of the evidence against him.
anyway - contador is now a proven drug cheat and rightly banned