Webber on Armstrong.

Nice piece, well written, and will resonate with a lot of people I think.

I think what’s staggering to everyone is the amount of people he was prepared to take out on the way up; people who were morally on the right side of the bridge. He wasn’t worried about the ramifications and the position he may have put these people in; it was all about Planet Lance.
That’s why, Lance, using your words, the “death” penalty isn’t too heavy. You rubbed a lot of people’s noses in it for so long and treated the rest of us like idiots.

Over here.

Well he seemed quite imformed to say the least. I also noticed how he lumped Contador in with all the major dopers of the era –

We’ll never know but some of them on their day could have challenged the likes of Armstrong, Ivan Basso, Jan Ullrich, Alexander Vinokourov, Alberto Contador, Richard Virenque and so on

Hah yeah probably just to wind Alonso up a bit 🙂

Good piece. I’m quite surprised it’s not more of an issue in F1 where there are huge budgets and an apparent willingness to push the rules to the limits in pursuit of tiny fractions of a second.

The next PED shocker will be Tennis.

Interesting. I think his observation that Armstrong still doesn’t see himself as cheating was a good one.

Armstrong seems to still believe that because the system was corrupt he was just doign what he needed to do and ignores all the people he damaged as a part of his own activity.

Tennis? And you base that on?

Jamaican sprinting is ‘on another planet’ these days. I hear there’s pretty much no out of competition testing in athletics.

He did come across a bit arrogant & defiant in the Oprah interview I said that to the Missus,Webber knows his shit !.

Interesting. I think his observation that Armstrong still doesn’t see himself as cheating was a good one.

Yes, interesting one that. Can see why though. Their team comes to Europe to race and gets blown away by the big teams with serious doping programs, and a governing body that tacitly approved. I think he just saw doping as part of what it meant to be a professional cyclist at the time.

Tennis? And you base that on?

Useless testing and the ability to play five set matches on consecutive days and hit the ball at 120mph every stroke while chasing down every ball like your life depends on it.

Watch a game from ten years back and compare. It’s total madness these days. I’m betting growth hormone.

And hasn’t that doping Dr on trial in Spain at the moment implicated tennis and some football as well as cycling? Sure I heard that on the radio yesteday

I think he just saw doping as part of what it meant to be a professional cyclist at the time.

To be honest, on that point he’s not really wrong and I don’t really care that he doped because they all did. I also don’t really care that he ‘bullied’ team mates into it; they were all grown men and could make their own decisions.

The problem with Armstrong is that he didn’t just deny doping, he tried to destroy anyone who said that he did with vicious and prolonged attacks. His money and power meant that innocent reputations were trampled and lives and livelihoods destroyed. So, Lancey, the life-ban is warranted so suck it up.

I wouldn’t be surprised if there was doping in tennis, just thought you had something other than your observations to base it on, that was all. I would say that there is less chance of getting to the top using PEDs in tennis than there is in the likes of cycling and athletics though, due to the level of technique and skill required.

I remember Alan shearer saying that he was never been drug tested in his entire career. That was astounding. There is definitely a market in football for a certain type of player, a destroyer, usually African, strong as an ox and can tackle and run all day. I realise that may sound like I’m some sort of racist, which I’m not, it’s just a fact. Pretty much every top team has that type of player nowadays.

Why tennis? It’s a sport where PED use would be very effective. You also have a few players at the top of the sport demanding better testing.

I would say that there is less chance of getting to the top using PEDs in tennis than there is in the likes of cycling and athletics though, due to the level of technique and skill required.

Don’t agree with this. Think there is likely very little to choose between the top players in terms of skill, fractions of a percent maybe. However if a player can significantly increase his strength and endurance then that can outweigh the tiny differences in skill.

Check the Tennis forums. People have been aware of PED use for a while.

Where has that Spanish Tennis player gone who used smash everyone? Have a look at photo’s of Murray from a couple years back to today. Look at his neck FFS! Check Jokervic towards the end of a five setter. He plays like he’s just walked onto the court.

It’s more blatant than cycling IMO.

Yep, think it’s rife in pretty much every sport.. I remember reading an interview with a blood doping expert (don’t think it was Ashenden?) who was highly skeptical of the recent Olympics, and strongly implied that he believed that a lot of performances were highly suspect and testing inadequate.

The reason cycling has all the scandals is simply because it has the most advanced drugs testing. Rugby, football, tennis etc would be screwed if they had the same level of testing.

It may be blatant in Tennis, but Tennis (like Football) is much better controlled than Cycling and the governing bodies have always been clear that their job is to make sure that there is no bad publicity. Cycling went through a brief period where, for various reasons due to multiple groups being “in charge”, they actually tried to catch the cheats. They’ve tried to roll back from that recently (hardly any positives from the last few tours, for example) but the cat is out of the bag. Tennis wont make that mistake.

I saw somewhere that there were more than 2000 out of competition blood tests in cycling in 2011. In tennis there were 6. (Not 6000, 6.)

Good article

Interesting. I think his observation that Armstrong still doesn’t see himself as cheating was a good one.

There was an interview recently with a former senior UCI man, his memories are of telling the riders to back off a little as they were starting to look a “bit” obvious.

Nothing like a blind eye and all that…

At the top level in tennis, and probably most sports when you think about it, the difference between winning and losing is primarily mental – probably any of the top 10, maybe top 20 have got the skillz to win a major. So it probably doesn’t matter what exactly the doping is, whether its blood, hormones, whatever, it’s that little edge that makes the player think, as they line up on court, that they’ve got a little something extra over their opponent and it’s that thought, not the something itself, that makes the difference. They could probably inject saline if the doctor told them it was a new secret wonderdrug, and it would have the same effect.

Rugby gets my vote. It’s another sport where you can look at players from not that far back and see how much physiques and the intensity of the game has changed.

I’m not entirely convinced that this can be put down to diet and training alone.

Think there is a massive advantage in sports like tennis. Just think about how difficult it can be to apply riding skills on a bike when you’re knackered at the end of a hard ride or race. Better strength and endurance allows you to better apply the skills you have.

In cycling I don’t think it’s the testing that’s making the difference. Biological passport has helped but the big changes have mostly come about from the criminalisation of doping activities in some countries and the French gendarmerie.

Rugby has changed as a sport / sporting culture though, hasn’t it, massively increased professionalism and completely different attitude towards training, diet etc. compared to 20 years ago when it was still quite jolly gentlemen amateur(ish) (thinking about union, obviously).

Watch a game from ten years back and compare. It’s total madness these days. I’m betting growth hormone.

But if you have watched tennis over that time you can see the gradual progression of speed and technique, and also the height of the players, which is much more than it was.

Regularly an exceptional player comes along that plays at a higher level, and forces other players to move to that level or fall away, and new players that are developing and later come onto the scene are used to playing at that speed and power. Obviously graphite rackets were an enabling technology here.

An example was when Lendl came onto the scene, blasting groundshots all over the place, and then Becker, and then Courier and Sampras, then Federer, then Nadal.

If drugs are being used in tennis they will not be for endurance reasons, they will be to control the state of mind, to try to get the player into ‘the zone’. Rudeski always seemed to have a head cold, and say that his coach had given him a concoction of aspirin, etc, but it was probably just to zone him in, caffeine being quite effective at this.

There’s a lot of players at similar skill levels and the thing that differentiates them is how they control their head, same goes with golf.

There are loads of highly skilled players that lose to lesser players that have better match heads, otherwise Federer should win all the time, for example.

Where has that Spanish Tennis player gone who used smash everyone?

Suffering from a knee injury, and it was pretty obvious it was going to happen by looking at his goofy style, which relied on his freaky physical attributes. Same goes with Tiger Woods, you could see that he was heading for knee problems from his swing, and he has had to have surgery and change his swing and still hasn’t come back properly.

Have a look at photo’s of Murray from a couple years back to today.

and then look at how he has gradually changed over time as he has worked in the gym. He has had to bulk up to deal with stronger players, or taller players.

Rugby gets my vote. It’s another sport where you can look at players from not that far back and see how much physiques and the intensity of the game has changed.

I’m not entirely convinced that this can be put down to diet and training alone.

not training in the pub might have helped.
Listening to the tales of 60’s/70’s rugby and footie players I’m amazed they could last the game.

Have a look at photo’s of Murray from a couple years back to today.

Isn’t Murray one of the most vocal in regard to wanting better out of competition testing? Obviously that is no guarantee or anything but I’m inclined to think he’s one of the cleaner ones.

I agree with much of what he says,but what I find strange is Webber claims he has known about Armstrong and his doping since 2008 and lots of people on here claim they have known since the beginning of time.
However both Wiggins and Cavendish have made comments or had photo’s taken in the past with Armstrong which imply they did not know about his dopping at the time.

Also Webber himself once had a full body transplant while racing Mountain Mayhem.

However both Wiggins and Cavendish have made comments or had photo’s taken in the past with Armstrong which imply they did not know about his dopping at the time.

Surely it implies they did know about the doping back then, crickey if you can ride in the tour of that era and not know about doping, come off it?

You would think they would know and I can understand why they would not want to come out and say something and face the might of Armstrongs legal teams, but why would Wiggins say he was beat by 3 better men when he came 4th, if he knew at least one was doping.

There’s a lot of players at similar skill levels and the thing that differentiates them is how they control their head, same goes with golf.

Golf is another sport where doping is rife. Mostly caffeine and beta blockers but it’s the same principle. They’re all wired on caffeine for concentration and alertness but then dosed up on beta blockers to keep the blood pressure right down. It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if F1 drivers used a similar protocol.

I agree with much of what he says,but what I find strange is Webber claims he has known about Armstrong and his doping since 2008 and lots of people on here claim they have known since the beginning of time.

Mark Webber’s article on LA is very interesting. As mentioned, everyone else is suddenly coming out of the woodwork to say “oh yes we knew”. Yes but you [by which I mean the wider cycling community, magazine editors etc] didn’t say anything back then did you?! Back when your magazine/website were getting exclusive interviews/photos with LA and selling copy, you were quite happy to brush the doping under the carpet. The UCI were quite happy to reap the profits of increased exposure worldwide while telling athletes on the quiet to please stop making it *quite* so blindingly obvious.
That’s the power of the omerta and of LA’s influence

Other governing bodies haven’t made the same mistake of even trying to expose doping. Classic head-in-the-sand. The situation in other sports is no different to cycling.

but why would Wiggins say he was beat by 3 better men when he came 4th, if he knew at least one was doping.

not crapping on your own door step?

There’s a lot of players at similar skill levels and the thing that differentiates them is how they control their head, same goes with golf.

Just heard on the radio this morning that some golfer’s been found using a prohibited anabolic substance (deer-antler extract or something). Not just to get him in the right frame of mind for hitting a ball 350yards, I suppose

but why would Wiggins say he was beat by 3 better men when he came 4th, if he knew at least one was doping

You could spin that in a very cynical way…

Personally I believe keeping quiet protected the sport…especially if you’re just making a name for yourself the last thing you want to do is rock the boat…

You rock the boat when you’re washed up retired and need the cash… Millar, Landis, Hamilton et al

Speaking of rugby and cycling (and possible doping in both), has anyone seen that ad on TV with Wiggins training that’s actually about the new rugby season? I had heard he was a big Wigan Warriors fan but still struck me as a bit odd.

Totally agree with you crazy legs!

also agree that riders would keep quite as they established themselves, but also think they could distance themselves without actually saying anything.

Millar does hit about Armstrong at the end of his book.

If drugs are being used in tennis they will not be for endurance reasons, they will be to control the state of mind, to try to get the player into ‘the zone’

Eh? rubbish. There’s a huge physical aspect to professional tennis, they do/could benefit from far more than drugs just to help them ‘get into the zone’. HGR, transfusions, corticoids, steroids etc. would all provide significant benefits.

Not just to get him in the right frame of mind for hitting a ball 350yards, I suppose

it is not strength that knocks the ball 350 yards, but the timing that allows you to use the technology in the club so well. So beta blockers might be effective here, not sure about the caffeine that someone suggested, that would just make you edgy.

Witness how much better people play in the afternoon after a few beers at lunch…

Golf is another sport where doping is rife. Mostly caffeine and beta blockers but it’s the same principle. They’re all wired on caffeine for concentration and alertness but then dosed up on beta blockers to keep the blood pressure right down

if this is true why do no recent players, except Woods, exhibit the high concentration levels of players like Nicklaus, Watson, Hogan, etc?