Lance Armstrong - about time too! - Page 8

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond 

 It's not as if he did not have talent.

This is definitely an overlooked point. My boss at work is one of the idiots that feels that given enough time, patience, and dedication one can master any simple sport. He feels that if you just swam over and over and over for years of course you'd be good and be pro. Or if you just ride a bike for a long time, eventually you would be good enough to go pro. He also conveniently ignores his logic when it comes to his babies like basketball and football, and golf. He says those sports you have to be gifted with coordination and whatnot but cycling I would argue requires just as much pardon the phrase but "god given" talent and athleticism.  These people do the absolutely INSANE.  They are riding over 100 miles a day over larger altitude changes than are capable in pretty much the entire midwest from eastern colorado to western virginia and doing it at just ridiculous speeds. Yes 25mph isn't fast...in a CAR, but on a bike, or even sprinting, it's nearly impossible to keep that pace unless you have practiced extensively, have worked very hard to keep your body in amazing shape, or you are riding in a large enough group that you can ride in the draft for extended periods of time on a downslope or a very flat grade. I may heavily dislike this man, but he IS a freak of nature like Phelps is to swimming, or Beckham (not a fan but he's popular) and Roberto Carlos' magic freaking left foot in soccer. Or if you want to call dancing and play acting a talent we could give the art of flopping solely to Christiano Ronaldo :P

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkPrince 

My dad said one of the latest ways to legally get the benefits of EPO without actually using it is for athletes to train at lower altitudes and then purchase or build a hyperbaric chamber and sleep in that to replicate living in a higher altitude climate. This causes your body to create more red blood cells while consequently thickening your blood (the major MAJOR danger of using it) but your body becomes far more efficient with oxygen at regular altitudes when it "thinks" it's been at higher altitudes where the air is thinner. It's similar to having to rest and acclimate at different altitudes on Everest to make sure you don't die of altitude sickness.

 

Lastly, another tiny detail I omitted from my first post, the USADA stripped Armstrong of his titles, but USADA only has jurisdiction within the United States. The UCI is the governing body of cycling and they have requested to see the evidence that USADA has that prompted their decision. I would guess that UCI would likely follow suit but that doesn't mean they will. I liken it to say America stripping Merion Jones of her gold medal but the IOC does not...that would look very odd if that were the way it had happened.  Either way the evidence will likely never see the light of day, neither will the testimonies (whether for or against), but this is likely not over and won't be for a very long time.

Nice post, not just what I've quoted.  That's very interesting about the high altitude trainining followed by use of a low-pressure chamber.  It makes complete physiological sense of course, and it doesn't violate any of the rules about use of disqualified drugs/procedures, at least as far as I know.  Of course one reason why Kenyan long-distance runners have been so successful over the decades is that they grow up and train at high altitudes in that country, so that they have very active hematopoietic systems.  I haven't heard of one of them using a baro chamber but maybe they do ....

You're absolutely right about the dangers of excessive blood thinkening.  It can be lethal, and it's a danger that is spelled out in the information package you get with every prescription of erythropoeitin.

Clearly UCI need to look at all of the evidence before making a decision.  If they didn't, they would be heavily - and rightly - criticized.  As I said, I think that all of the evidence should also be made publicly available.  Then we can decide whether to believe LA or not.  Absent that, we can only go with the information we currently have, which imo is very unfavorable to the cyclist.  His weaseling statements post the decision don't help his cause any, but that's just mho and I'm sure it's a very unpopular one with many in the cycling community.

It isn't an either/or situation. You can live high/train low and still using EPO and the rest of the drugs. Altitude is  a funny training stimulus. Some people have huge gains and swear by it. Others have big regressions and swear at it.

And not to you but endurance sports require more natural talent than any other sport. Sports like golf, baseball, basketball, and football has a lot of skill based stuff that can be trained.  In endurance sports it is all about how your body responds to training. The top guys all say they work hard and that is why they are sucessful. The reality is that they work hard but also got more of a training response than the average person. They can also recover. For example Lance has said several  times that he worked harder than anyone in the world. That might be true. But a lot of guys want to work a lot harder than they do. Why don't they? Because when they try their body breaks down (they get sick, tear something,....). This is were steroids and the like come in for endurance athletes. Instead of building big muscles, the put your current ones back together quicker so you can do 10% more training.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chas 

Nice post, not just what I've quoted.  That's very interesting about the high altitude trainining followed by use of a low-pressure chamber.  It makes complete physiological sense of course, and it doesn't violate any of the rules about use of disqualified drugs/procedures, at least as far as I know.  Of course one reason why Kenyan long-distance runners have been so successful over the decades is that they grow up and train at high altitudes in that country, so that they have very active hematopoietic systems.  I haven't heard of one of them using a baro chamber but maybe they do ....

 

You're absolutely right about the dangers of excessive blood thinkening.  It can be lethal, and it's a danger that is spelled out in the information package you get with every prescription of erythropoeitin.

 

Clearly UCI need to look at all of the evidence before making a decision.  If they didn't, they would be heavily - and rightly - criticized.  As I said, I think that all of the evidence should also be made publicly available.  Then we can decide whether to believe LA or not.  Absent that, we can only go with the information we currently have, which imo is very unfavorable to the cyclist.  His weaseling statements post the decision don't help his cause any, but that's just mho and I'm sure it's a very unpopular one with many in the cycling community.

That's interesting, I guess I didn't appreciate that aspect of the use of certain drugs like steroids - to promote healing/recovery.  Makes sense.

Another endurance/strength sport is rowing, particularly sculling.  Karppinen, the great Finnish scullter, was said to have a greatly enlarged heart and thus extraordinary aerobic capacity.  And he could push his body where others simply could not follow. Competitive rowers at all levels really stress their bodies, and indeed ALL of the major muscle groups are heavily involved in that sport.  You read about what some rowers go through in the last 100 yards or so of a major race and it's amazing.  They can almost lose consciousness with the effort and stress, pushing through waves of pain and fatigue to get to the line.

I wonder if doping has been a major issue in rowing as well.  I haven't read about that but then again you don't read much about rowing other than at the Olympics where even then it gets very modest coverage.  I used to own a scull myself - that was the most rigorous type of exercise I ever did.  Of course that was before I became an old *art and took up golf ..... :>)

such a dissappointment

my opinion on the whole thing.. lance armstrong has been tested through blood and urine samples more than anyone and he's never failed a test. does that mean he didn't dope? no.. but why implement testing if you can pass all of them and still get ****ed. every elite cyclist dopes, they go after the champ because nobody cares if the guy that gets 3rd in the tour de france one year is doping, but if the same guy were to win he'd get busted as well. to be a competitive cyclist at that level you have to dope.

It's funny reading back through the first 4 pages of this thread.  I posted on page 1 and then unsubscribed because of the absurdity.  It's really alarming that in this day and age of information how many things we can cling to believing in because we want to.

Anyhow, I still won't believe that a full and sincere admission of guilt is coming until I see the transcript, because of how many years Lance has been such a compulsive liar.  I pretty much expect him to apologize for "letting his fans down" by doing some "things he regrets," but admitting to nothing specific.  That way, his naive defenders of the past 10 years can still have something to cling on to.

Then again, Oprah wouldn't hype up something that vague, would she?

I was on the fence with Lance's use of PEDS, but defended him in the sense I thought this was more of a witch hunt initiated by the French to discredit Armstrong's accomplishments.  I've lost all respect for Armstrong at this point.   

I could accept him lying to the investigators to save himself but he attacked the reputation of fellow teammates and caused them financial harm just to cover up his use, which in my book is deplorable.   Guys like him and Clemons seem to have no conscience when it comes to defending their egos at any cost.  Sorry Lance, but it's time to pay for your sins, and I hope the price is high. 

Shorty, bplewis, X129 and some others had it right all along. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtogolf 

I was on the fence with Lance's use of PEDS, but defended him in the sense I thought this was more of a witch hunt initiated by the French to discredit Armstrong's accomplishments.  I've lost all respect for Armstrong at this point.   

 

I could accept him lying to the investigators to save himself but he attacked the reputation of fellow teammates and caused them financial harm just to cover up his use, which in my book is deplorable.   Guys like him and Clemons seem to have no conscience when it comes to defending their egos at any cost.  Sorry Lance, but it's time to pay for your sins, and I hope the price is high. 

 

Shorty, bplewis, X129 and some others had it right all along. 

Exactly.  I didn't really care about the doping because I didn't (and still don't) care about cycling, and it seems like they all do it.  But to go so far as to destroy innocent people (one of whom was apparently his best friend at one time) is beyond disgusting.  I also agree that the price should be really high.

And, yes, props to Shorty, Brandon and X for seeing him for what he is. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtogolf 

I was on the fence with Lance's use of PEDS, but defended him in the sense I thought this was more of a witch hunt initiated by the French to discredit Armstrong's accomplishments.  I've lost all respect for Armstrong at this point.   

 

I could accept him lying to the investigators to save himself but he attacked the reputation of fellow teammates and caused them financial harm just to cover up his use, which in my book is deplorable.   Guys like him and Clemons seem to have no conscience when it comes to defending their egos at any cost.  Sorry Lance, but it's time to pay for your sins, and I hope the price is high. 

 

Shorty, bplewis, X129 and some others had it right all along. 

I held onto hope for a long time that Armstrong was innocent. He seemed like a genuinely good guy and it was a wonderful story. For it to end like this is a shame. The sad part is that the next time there is a great story like Armstrong's was, people will be even more doubtful of it, even if it is true.

Seeing that he is coming out on Oprah, to me it seems like he's probably going to try and twist it into a sob story about how he was...forced or coerced into it. Again not to take away from the whole cancer survivor thing, but according to rumors and former team mates he's been doing it even before the cancer.  My dad brought up a point today though. It doesn't matter whether he admits to being guilty (since everyone knows it anyway), it's not coming clean until he comes forward and apologizes to all of the  teammates (past and present), doctors, officials and sponsors that had their lives destroyed by his constant lies and threats. In his quest for secrecy he has badmouthed so many people that at one time supported him it's absurd.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tristanhilton85 

I held onto hope for a long time that Armstrong was innocent. He seemed like a genuinely good guy and it was a wonderful story. For it to end like this is a shame. The sad part is that the next time there is a great story like Armstrong's was, people will be even more doubtful of it, even if it is true.

I gave up on that one a long time ago. It was too hard to believe that in a sport in which a lot of the top riders have been caught at one time or another, someone who did not use PEDs could win that many races.  

Are any of you planning on watching the interview?  I've never really liked Oprah (I don't dislike her or anything), so I can't really see myself watching it.  I'm genuinely curious to know what is said though.  Like others have mentioned, people lie to save themselves all the time, but he proactively attacked some of his colleagues and former friends and I'm curious if he addresses that.