Clearly you are in the good camp then lifer and aracer?
Millar is better than Armstrong as he has handled being a cheat differently and seems to be trying to do some good and change the sport, for the better, as a result of his experience.
Neither are as good as someone who has never cheated.
Atlaz, No, the best dopers were winning the races - everyone was doping!
the doping affects different people in different ways - so you can't say that they would have the same results without the doping.
That radio 5 program "Peddlers..." was pretty good and enlightening.
I liked it when that Emma said she lance called her a prostitute after she blew the whistle and she said (something like) "do I look like a prostitute? And if I did why would I still be here earning this money"
Heh, this thread's going round in circles. Again.....
I'm in the camp that thinks he's worth listening to. His past actually gives a more complete perspective than if he was totally clean.
Absolutely. Doping is one of the best things that ever happened to Millar. It was genuinely the making of him, he's come out the other side much more mature and sensible and is actually trying to do some good from it. He's a well known and respected voice not just for the worlds media but also within the peloton.
but also within the peloton
Not convinced that this is the case, certainly with the media but there are plenty of continental pros who think otherwise.
Millar is better than Armstrong as he has handled being a cheat differently and seems to be trying to do some good and change the sport, for the better, as a result of his experience.
Neither are as good as someone who has never cheated.
That is a SCIENCE fact, right there.
Who reckons doping only gives a 4% power increase? The Lille protocol (Festina) was good for 10-15% when tested on elite amateurs. Current performances are stil highly suspicious. Cantador for example up Verbier in the 09 Tour was between 1852 and 1900m/h, that's faster than Riis, or anyone else ever for that matter.
The sharks are starting to circle,,, I can't help but think that this is the start of an avalanche
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/20029617 ]got a spare $7m Lance?[/url]
Aso owns a lot of races , not just the tdf . Pari nice , a lot of the classics , i think they have some shares in the Vuelta too .
The dont need the UCI .
The sharks are starting to circle,,, I can't help but think that this is the start of an avalanche
He is screwed. Properly ****ed. The courts are going to take him for every penny he's got now. All his race winnings. All the money he got from suing others like the Sunday Times.
That's about the most complete transformation from hero to zero I've ever seen.
trickydisco - Member
"spxxky - Member
Does anyone REALLY believe that Merckx, Indurain, etc. were 'clean'""If you're going to choose someone as a 'do you really believe xxxx was clean' then try and pick someone who didn't test positive!"
Merckx did.. He tested positive 3 times and was kicked off the giro in 1969
Yeah that was my point...
aracer - Member
"Clearly you are in the good camp then lifer and aracer?"
I'm in the camp that thinks he's worth listening to. His past actually gives a more complete perspective than if he was totally clean.
Well said.
Macavity - Member
Greg Lemond on reduced sanctions for riders who give up their suppliers:“I’d much rather have a Floyd (Landis) come out and admit it, but give up his source, because somebody’s giving those drugs to somebody. And it’s usually a doctor, a team manager, somebody. And if they do that and it leads to an outing of those guys, I’m all for them racing within six months. Second time, you’re out."
Agree with that too.
GLUMP
Millar handled being race leader very well after the tragic death of Walter Waylandt. One hopes there is more to an athlete than doping and ruthless competitiveness, his behaviour that day went some way to prove that.
Edukator, Lemond called foul on Bertie up verbier almost immediately. I've read somewhere (a link on bike radar) that it would have taken a higher V02 max than anyone in TdF history had ever registered. Given that lala was on berties team that year, it isn't hard to imagine Bertie making sure that he was 'well prepared'.
Hmmm. It seems that Geoffery Lemond, Gregs son, is suggesting that Armstrong devoted a meeting of Livestrong to how write bad stuff about Greg Lemond.
He's a charmer is our Lance.
Edukator, Lemond called foul on Bertie up verbier almost immediately. I've read somewhere (a link on bike radar) that it would have taken a higher V02 max than anyone in TdF history had ever registered. Given that lala was on berties team that year, it isn't hard to imagine Bertie making sure that he was 'well prepared'.
I've read this on Cycling News, I believe what he said was along the lines of "that's almost certainly impossible, get in a lab and prove you can"
Probably should dig that out, too busy eating pie
"He threatened my wife, my business, my life," LeMond told the newspaper. "His biggest threat consisted of saying he would find 10 people to testify that I took EPO. Of course, he didn't find a single one."
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2006-06-26-armstrong-lemond_x.htm
Thought I'd pick an article from 2006, just in case anyone plays the "why now, why so much hate now" card
*Edit - Sorry, not what you was looking. This pie is awesome, cant focus
ahh wow, that pie was some good s**t
Don't be shy.....show us your pie!
Yes, the pie is interesting me, what pie?
I don't actually believe pie has been consumed, at least not until I see a positive test. 👿
Yes, the pie is interesting me, what pie?
e pie o?
e pie o?
/applauds
Current performances are stil highly suspicious. Cantador for example
Dirty as ****. I mean, come on, he tested positive for something that he would never come across, with blood doping as pretty much the only way into his system, unless he was eating a cow that had been doped a couple of hours earlier. And, as pointed out before, his performances were questionable.
But, given the duels with Schleck, that'd suggest Schleck also doped, particularly when you look at his performance increase from 2009 to 2010 in the Tdf individual TTs.
Yes, the pie is interesting me, what pie?
we want pie! we want pie! we want pie!
[url=
about a song? [/url]
suggest Schleck also doped, particularly when you look at his [u][b]brother being disqualified and the fact the Schleck bros papa is down with McQuaid (second statement is based on something I read some time ago and I am not entirely sure of its accuracy)[/b][/u]
Any armchair legal experts on here? ( 🙂 ) SCA want their 7.5 million dollars back....I imagine that LA will manage that....will he avoid trouble for originally testifying in court that he never doped? Wasn't perjury the reason that Marion Jones did time? I'd presume that LA still has a few friends in higher places than Marion had.
Alex, schlecks papa will probably be in with McQuaid as he's on the board of the Luxembourg cycling federation. He along with Schlecks uncle were on the panel that heard Frank Schlecks doping case last week.
Seriously!
I thought there was a clause in the SCA settlement that said they couldn't come back and challenge it later but that may not count where perjury is involved
I hope
But, given the duels with Schleck, that'd suggest Schleck also doped, particularly when you look at his performance increase from 2009 to 2010 in the Tdf individual TTs
It didn't really look like he did a great job on the TTs in 2010. 2011 he improved but still got smashed by Cadel.
He along with Schlecks uncle were on the panel that heard Frank Schlecks doping case last week.
I still think he'll get a ban. Sort of makes no difference really what the local bodies do if there's no evidence about how that stuff got into his system, he's done.
crikey - Member
Yes, the pie is interesting me, what pie?
Well it's certainly not of the humble persuasion.
Pumpkin pie here. With spices and stuff. I'll not pass a carbohydrate test and my cinnamon levels are off the scale.
[img] 
[/img]
Well, I suppose SCA could take a particularly jaundiced view and have have lala tried for perjury rather than attempt to get their money back.
It didn't really look like he did a great job on the TTs in 2010. 2011 he improved but still got smashed by Cadel.
He was only 30s slower than Contador on the penultimate TT in the 2010 Tour, when he'd been expected to be a couple of minutes down. It stood out in particular because of all the chat about 'he hasn't got the body shape for it' and suchlike. That's when alarm bells started ringing in my head, at least
Not really sure you want a photo of a pie after it's been eaten.
There is still time though, haven't had my first caffeine kick start yet!?
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/20038998 ]Payback time.[/url]
Just heard on BBC News that UCI have confirmed there will be no 'winner' of the TdF from '99 to '05.
Armstrong has also been asked to return $7.5m in bonuses to Texas insurance company SCA Promotions.
Well, that's that started (from Nobbys link)
It also says that the rules dictate he must pay back the £2.4m TdF prize money he won which would, normally, be shared with team mates. I wonder whether he'd have the balls to ask then for it? :-/
54 pages..
Well done lads.
I'm happy that LA's been stripped of his TdF Wins, happy he's been asked to return prize money, happy that (some of) his sponsors are asking for prize money returns.
I still think a closed year of any ProTour races would do the sport a great deal of good. No Races, nothing, Then in 2014 start over, let the BioPassports continue for all those that want to compete/train in rediness for the forthcoming seeason, just take a year off.
I know this will damage YoungUn's starting out in ProTour but the sport needs to clear itself of not only all the Drug fiasco, but clense the Management too.
Currently there are some exceptional riders being booted off teams because of lack ot ProTour points and their job is a domi, someone who supports.. this rule kills any cohesive team structure and ought to be thrown out.
Along with FatMcQuid.
Thankfully your crackpot idea will never happen.
Someone mentioned the SCA claim. Vague recollection that he got the money out of them because the bonus was if he won, no qualification of how. So him being stripped of the title would mean he didn't win so wasn't due the bonus.
I suspect he's going to discover how much fun it is being on the other side of an avalanche of litigation.
Someone mentioned the SCA claim. Vague recollection that he got the money out of them because the bonus was if he won, no qualification of how. So him being stripped of the title would mean he didn't win so wasn't due the bonus.I suspect he's going to discover how much fun it is being on the other side of an avalanche of litigation.
Yup, some 7.5 million dollars. SCA also paid about 2.5 million in legal fees for armstrong which i suspect they'll want back with interest, along with payment of their own legal fees. Then there's the 4.5 million that ASO will want back for tour winnings. Though I suspect Lance will be more bothered about the jail term for perjury.
Edit: also wonder if they'll reopen that federal fraud investigation that they suspiciously dropped?
Just heard on BBC News that UCI have confirmed there will be no 'winner' of the TdF from '99 to '05.
No mention I can find in online reports, or on cyclingnews (who I'd expect to have that story before the BBC if/when it happens). Are you sure you're not getting confused by Prudhomme (who is ASO, not UCI) expressing his wishes that that is the case?
