[stimpy]

Cycling was one of the dirtiest sports if not *the* dirtiest. Everyone was doing it and if you wanted to compete you had to do it to be on level playing ground.

What is happening to Lance is a witch hunt to shore up the sport from here on out. The focus really should be on the now and future but they are making an example out of him.

It's a damn shame really.

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by stimpy

Cycling was one of the dirtiest sports if not *the* dirtiest. Everyone was doing it and if you wanted to compete you had to do it to be on level playing ground.

What is happening to Lance is a witch hunt to shore up the sport from here on out. The focus really should be on the now and future but they are making an example out of him.

It's a damn shame really.

+10000

[DiavelM3]

Originally Posted by Foodle

Huge difference between cheating at your sport (Lance) and cheating on your wife (Tiger) or murdering animals (Vick). The latter two are forgivable if you keep winning (see Vick, not so much Tiger). The former is a death sentence. Nike cannot be associated with cheating at sports. The other stuff happens off the field, so no biggie.

I agree but aren't these still just accusations regarding Lance?

[Maestro]

Well you all knew this was coming, They have Officially strip him of all his win, they are going after his Olympic metal and France want him to pay back all the prize money he won.

[Litos]

lance had an elite team working for him and the USPS to help hide all the doping.....

you know the entire team was doping - Lance was just the most winningest cycler in the world.

the truth will come out.....

[carogers86]

85% plus pro cyclists dope in some form during the TdF it seems. Why would Lance still always win?

[MisterSkiMask]

They never caught him doing anything wrong, as far as I know, leave him alone! What a f*cking waste of time and money.

[US///M3]

How come Greg Lemond still has his three tour de france wins?
Cmon guys,you really think all of Lance teammates made up stories of doping?

[US///M3]

Defending Lance is no different than DC residents defending Marion Barry and talkin about how He was set up.

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by carogers86

85% plus pro cyclists dope in some form during the TdF it seems. Why would Lance still always win?

How's that fair to the 15% pro cyclists that are clean?

[carogers86]

Originally Posted by US///M3

How's that fair to the 15% pro cyclists that are clean?

It's not fair at all. Just wondering why, out of the dopers, he would always win.

[MidwestGolfBum]

Originally Posted by carogers86

It's not fair at all. Just wondering why, out of the dopers, he would always win.

The reason is, because he was better than all the rest, had the best support group, and had the best equipment.

[carogers86]

"Better than all the rest."

Hypothetical scenario: If a doping control system was so effective 100% of riders were racing clean during the 7 times Lance won the Tour de France, would he still have won? Given that he had the best team, equipment, and support? It is obvious he can win against the best riders that dope.

I liken it to a performance car race where turbos are restricted, but an overwhelming majority of clever racers contrive a way to develop small turbos undetectable by race organization. One rider wins successively.

Are the turbos (or dope) the game changer, or the constant?

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by ecjohnston

The reason is, because he was better than all the rest, had the best support group, and had the best equipment.

Also had the most sophisticated doping program sports have ever seen.

Now we'll never know how much of his wins can be attributed to him being the best athlete or him running the best doping program.

[US///M3]

What some people are not taking into account is that endurance is a big part of the tour de France,not special skills on how you shoot,aim,hit the ball...like in tennis,basketball etc.

[carogers86]

Originally Posted by US///M3

Also had the most sophisticated doping program sports have ever seen.

Now we'll never know how much of his wins can be attributed to him being the best athlete or him running the best doping program.

Sophisticated in the sense of evading detection. Not certain if the doping "formula" was far superior to everyone else. And if it was, was it the difference? I would imagine all the postal boys would have access to the magical dope that makes you a tour winner. Thus, the 9 person postal team should have taken spots 1-9 every year, and Lance should not have won all 7.

Then again, this "michelli Ferrari" doping dr. guy had several pro cyclist clients. Why wouldn't he have sold them the tour winning dope product?

It's disappointing to see what has unfolded and for Lance to lose his titles. I feel he deserves the punishment dealt (losing titles), but I feel he really did have the legs to win the tour.

I mean, it's not like I could just give myself a shot of epo & a blood transfusion before the start of the 2013 Tour de France and smash everyone.

[amanda hor$t]

you know east germany had an entire program dedicated to doping and escaping detection for the olympics. pretty sure china's doing some of that too.

when you're up there, that's the edge it gives you to win

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by carogers86

Sophisticated in the sense of evading detection. Not certain if the doping "formula" was far superior to everyone else. And if it was, was it the difference? I would imagine all the postal boys would have access to the magical dope that makes you a tour winner. Thus, the 9 person postal team should have taken spots 1-9 every year, and Lance should not have won all 7.

Then again, this "michelli Ferrari" doping dr. guy had several pro cyclist clients. Why wouldn't he have sold them the tour winning dope product?

It's disappointing to see what has unfolded and for Lance to lose his titles. I feel he deserves the punishment dealt (losing titles), but I feel he really did have the legs to win the tour.

I mean, it's not like I could just give myself a shot of epo & a blood transfusion before the start of the 2013 Tour de France and smash everyone.

It's not about you,think about the guy who placed second or third. They were consistently within 100ths of a second of Lance at various stages.
That's when a blood transfusion for example can make a difference .Your other assumption the guy who placed second was also doping at the same level as lance.

Most here are saying all the cyclists did it but Lance Armstrong under oath categorically denied talking any banned enhanced performance drugs.
I really applaud the US gov on this, they forced the UCI a recipient of Armstrong and his sponsors donations to stop covering up LA's past doping.

[carogers86]

US/M3,

They weren't consistently within hundredths of a second in any Tour de France Lance won. He won by several minutes over the course of the three week long race. His smallest margin was 63 seconds. I used to race at the national level, that's a pretty big margin.

My point was 2nd and third place in the 2003 Tour de France, for example, were involved in doping. If
they doped and lance doped, (dopers competing against dopers) what was that "something extra" that allowed Lance to always win?

[STIto335]

Originally Posted by carogers86

My point was 2nd and third place in the 2003 Tour de France, for example, were involved in doping. If
they doped and lance doped, (dopers competing against dopers) what was that "something extra" that allowed Lance to always win?

Duh he only has one nut. Wiggo is talking about taking both of his out and going for all the grand tours next year.

[carogers86]

Originally Posted by STIto335

Duh he only has one nut. Wiggo is talking about taking both of his out and going for all the grand tours next year.

Hot coffee nearly came out of my nose reading that post.

Holy moly

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by carogers86

US/M3,

They weren't consistently within hundredths of a second in any Tour de France Lance won. He won by several minutes over the course of the three week long race. His smallest margin was 63 seconds. I used to race at the national level, that's a pretty big margin.

My point was 2nd and third place in the 2003 Tour de France, for example, were involved in doping. If
they doped and lance doped, (dopers competing against dopers) what was that "something extra" that allowed Lance to always win?

The last tour 1st and second place times were within 1 minute and 34 seconds. You are assuming the other cyclists were on the same very complex enhanced performance substance cocktail regiment as Lance Armstrong.
Btw i autocrossed at the national level,i guess that makes me an expert on the inner workings of F1 over in Europe.