Tripleshot Cycling

big article outlining a bunch of stuff about the Lance Armstrong grand jury investigation into USPS team doping came out today

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htm

Josh.E wrote:big article outlining a bunch of stuff about (HWSNBN)

Good summary about HemAssist, etc, here: http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderrepor ... ng-points/

Note that "most of them never worked. HemAssist was one of the failures" refers to safety and effectiveness in their intended use - as blood boosters in trauma cases. As doping agents they rocked, if you discount the odd near fatal negative reaction or cardiac arrest.



"Maybe that’s why I’ve made it as far as I have – 2,521 miles. If I ran to a doctor every time I got a little cyst or abrasion I’d still be in Nova Scotia. Or else I'd never have started. I’ve seen people in so much pain. The little bit of pain I’m going through is nothing. They can't shut it off, and I can’t shut down every time I feel a little sore." - Terry Fox

"Dude, are you that stupid? Which part of I am not commenting is not clear to you?" - Lance Armstrong, 2011-01-19

He wins seven tours without a positive test, yet his credibility is in doubt because a guy who was asked to clean his room saw a little box in his bathroom with a label he can't even describe properly.

But, it's also important to know that he was cleaning up so Lance's girlfriend wouldn't see a picture of Lance's wife. So lance must have been on drugs cause he's a bad bad man. And, there's something else you should know. He's atheist!

It would have been very hard not to take drugs in the early nineties. I imagine Lance knows that if he admitted to anything from back then (if indeed he did take anything), no one would accept that he won the tour clean. Am I the only one who refuses to give up on the dream

Note: I once drank creatine just before a mountain bike race - but that was 12 years ago and I didn't swallow.

OK, I did. I'm sorry.

JT

Sorry, maybe I'm a bit sensitive. Thanks for posting the article.

John

Well you raise a good question John. What's a pro supposed to do if the sport is crooked and can't clean itself up? I think part of the problem with Lance is he couldn't just go along, he had to lead (read 'force and intimidate') his team, and the sport, full tilt into rampant doping, including we find out now, illegally using drugs (blood replacements) in their FDA testing phase- big no-no. But worse, he pretended to be a leader in the fight against cancer, all the while taking cancer appearance fees for himself, selling Livestrong.com to a private publisher, suing anyone who questioned his holy Lance-ness etc. One well-known pro with a clean reputation told me recently this is what really sticks in the craw about Pharmstrong. The bald-faced fraud around cancer. The doping stuff is just better than average for the dirty sport we all new existed.

But back to the original question. Personally, I think the real villain is Hein Verbruggen, former president for near-life (1970-something to 2005'ish) of the UCI. Or as I like to call him, VerDRUGgen. He did everything he could to avoid dealing with doping, and allegedly solicited bribes for covering up tests, among other dubious influence peddling. But aside from the allegations, we know for sure he delayed adding IOC banned substances and methods to the UCI list for years (Delgado got off a positive for a steroid masking substance in 1988 when Steve Bauer was in yellow because of this), and maintained ludicrous 10-minute penalites for steroids in the tour, up until the creation of WADA when he had no choice but to sign the WADA code or get booted from the Olympics. hell, WADA was created because of cycloing's festina scandal in 1998. Which VerDRUGgen denied. Cycling was the second last sport to sign. If there was no VerDRUGgen, there would have been no Lance.

JohnT wrote:Am I the only one who refuses to give up on the dream

No, but it's been a nightmare for a lot of people. The guy who "saw a little box" has relocated to Australia and is doing well now, fortunately, despite Lance's worst efforts. There are hopes and dreams and there are myths. That's why I posted pics and quotes from Terry and Lance. I can't imagine a bigger contrast.

JohnT wrote:He wins seven tours without a positive test

There have been MANY positive tests, all conveniently circumvented. Landis loses his one TdF win because of a T/E ratio violation, gets villified and ridiculed by Lance's army as mentally unstable and a drunk, and it turns out that Lance had three equivalent positive tests years before his first TdF win, before Floyd went to work for him.

JohnT wrote:I once drank creatine just before a mountain bike race... I'm sorry.

You have class and wholesome character traits. Lance is dominated by psychotic selfishness.

My opinion only. Maybe he'll be vindicated. Hopefully Verbruggen and McQuaid will go down at least as hard as he does.

I didn't want to barf up my opinions on Lance within Tripleshot. Tripleshot is cool and I knew there would be major differences of opinion, but I lack the will to keep it bottled up.

sylvan wrote: I didn't want to barf up my opinions on Lance within Tripleshot. Tripleshot is cool and I knew there would be major differences of opinion, but I lack the will to keep it bottled up.

Ditto me. I'll try to stop now.

I am in review/referee/edit mode at work. That's my excuse. But I also move the ottoman if it's not perfectly lined up with the livingroom chair, so there's more at work here.

Sylvan, the images you posted have the same effect as both articles (the S.I. and the one by Joe whatshisname in Bicycling). Lance wears silly sunglasses so he's guilty. Lance did something after cancer, oh, but he's got two legs. OK, not so impressive, he's guilty. S.I. reminds us that he left his wife and that he doesn't believe in god (must be guilty). The bicycling article is all about the drugs and nothing about Lance's connection to them. And, we're supposed to believe that there's something out there that does everything hemoglobin does only better - and that Lance got some and managed to use it for seven years successfully without anyone seeing. And, that he did this without the company that invented it knowing (If they knew, they'd be selling it to hospitals now). The main point of the Bicycling article: It must be true because if it wasn't S.I. wouldn't say it was because Lance would sue them.

I still appreciate the posts.

JT

Well there is that pesky detail of the lab finding 6 positives during epo research on 1999 samples. But no B sample, so he got off.

And three witnesses of him admitting in hosptital the stuff he was taking, including one taped admitting she had heard it, who then later denied it.

And the massage therpist who picked up secret packages across borders, and provided make-up to cover needle tracks. Oops! There I go again. Coulda been vitamins.

Lance might have been a doper. We loathe him for the possibility of cheating. How, in contrast do we feel about, I don't know, say David Millar? He is a self-confessed doper. Now's he's silver medal holder in the 2010 WC TT. Is he a hero or villian? He did dope, he said so, he said he won't dope anymore. Really? Why would/should we believe David over LA? Of course he would say that. I think we all want our professional cyclists to appear human, if only briefly.We enjoy finding their flaws, to seem them fall to the level, at or below our mere humble selves.

Th SI article, actually the Bicycling summary: I'm struggling with the time-lines on the claimed use of the synthetic hemoglobin, or whatever it was he was trying out. If it was in the late 1990's, that's kind of vague, since LA wasn't a professional cyclist for a period of time in the 'late 1990s' when he was, dare I remind everyone, fighting for his life - battling cancer. Or perhaps, the conspiracy theorists would say that the LA cancer thing was just a hoax, a clever way for LA and his posse to legitimately access experimental drugs, such as immune boosters... hm-mm... perhaps. Clever.

I'm a cynic of all charitable organizations. And the LAF doesn't do anything that any of the other charitable organizations do.. they run it like a 'business'. The bureaucrats that run these organizations know no other way. They aren't philanthropists by any stretch. They're wheelers and dealers. Take the 'Ride to Conquer Cancer' and the BC Cancer Foundation for example. They sold out to commercialism - bringing on 'the highest bidder' in this case the highly controversial ENBRIDGE - yes the same ENBRIDGE that ignores warning of pipe lines leaking; the same organization lobbying our BC government to 'open up the BC coast'. Everything is 'For Sale'. So, why would Livestrong.com be? Sorry, for the digression, the cynicism.

LAF, and Livestrong inspire cancer fighters everyday.

Perhaps the post of cancer survivor spokesperson isn't befitting of arguably the most narcissistic human being on the planet - LA, but at least he inspires, maybe not the cycling cynics, but certainly the people battling cancer.

The truth of LA doping would rock the country, and God knows what damage it could do to the cancer community. I place it on an impact scale larger than finding out that Obama is actually a woman..

plus the former teammates who have been brought in and questioned by a grand jury and have allegedly said there was systemic doping

plus the stories of Landis

plus the stories of Hamilton

plus the "I fail to recollect" answers his ex wife gave when questioned under oath

plus the $100,000 "donation" lance made to the UCI right after alleged tour de suisse positives in 2002

plus the chasing down and threatening of simeoni when he threatened to speak publicly about doping in pro cycling

plus popo getting nailed with PEDs by federal investigators and documents linking armstrong to ferrari as recently as 2009, when he claimed no contact since 2004

plus taking a shower when investigators showed up in 2009 before providing a sample, even though he is mandated to stay in sight of the testers at all times after being informed of a doping control

plus the 2009 hematocrit level that mysteriously rises over the hardest days of the 2009 tour instead of slowly falling of, like would happen with human beings being subjected to exerting that much effort day after day

plus the "approved" steroid positive for "saddle sore cream"

plus armstrong's entourage threatening greg lemond

plus the fact that everybody was doing it at the time, and almost all of the 2nd through 10th place finishers from the armstrong era have been caught or later admitted to doping

the circumstantial evidence, both about his character, and about his probable doping goes on and on if you start doing any research

Josh.E wrote:plus the 2009 hematocrit level that mysteriously rises over the hardest days of the 2009 tour instead of slowly falling of, like would happen with human beings being subjected to exerting that much effort day after day...

Which it did during the Giro that year. They posted his blood profiles from both races in 2009, then took them down when people pointed out what they showed. Oops.

Giro numbers, 43.5 down to 38.2: http://cdn-community2.livestrong.com/ve ... 2.Full.jpg

Tour numbers, 42.8 down to 40.7, whoops, up to 43.1, down to 41.7, whoops, up to 43: http://cdn-community2.livestrong.com/ve ... 4.Full.jpg

yeah, but as it stands, there still is no proof positive.

It is all still just speculation and unsubstantiated stories. Luckily, I think, we won't have to wait much longer to find out one way or the other. They say announcements on the investigation will be coming down the week after the superbowl.

I await with baited breath.....

So LA doped. Yeah? We act like we're surprised? I guess the part that we all loathe about him is that he 'just won't admit it'. Perhaps this is arrogance, perhaps it's his way of forcing the system to do a better job. I'm not doubting he doped, the piles of 'evidence' suggest he most likely did. So onto a more interesting question:

What benefit would it do for cycling or humanity for Lance to admit he doped? He's a cheat. Sure, I'll go with that. As much a cheat as half the peloton. They cheated for one reason - a reason that David Millar pointedly said... Fear. Fear that if he didn't cheat, his career would be over. If/when LA 'confesses' likely is that fear is the same reason.

Oddly enough, according to studies (sorry, I don't have my resources in front of me), the 'performance enhancements' that these elite level athletes use does very little to improve their 'edge'. Maybe 2 to 3% at best. What does boost their 'edge' is the confidence that is restored since now the playing field is re-levelled; now they 'have a shot'. No fear. Only guilt.

Do you think David Millar would have confessed if he hadn't been caught? We place our moral demand on these elite level athletes so high that we lose sight of what drove them to where they got to. As, I think Lister said, the witch hunt should be pointed to VerDRUGgen and to Pat McQuaid for largely ignoring the problem. Lance is no different in this respect than to David Millar, yet somehow, I find myself liking David and disliking Lance. I think that is probably more to do with their characters as humans than with their misgivings. LA, without question is as cocky and arrogant as he was when he was just starting out. Conquering cancer won't change that. Soften it a bit, but so does maturity, one would hope.

But let's get one thing straight, just because I ride a Trek, or heck even wear a yellow band on my wrist, doesn't mean I am an LA disciple. LA is what he is, a creature we created... a hero we wanted... except it was all an allusion, or so we're desperately wanting to hear. Put LA in his place. Next!

Contador seems to have escaped harms way? Let's talk trash about that little shit for a bit. But leave the Schlecks alone, and leave Motor powered Fabian alone. And Jens Voigt. They're sacred.

This is educational, I'm enjoying it and I hope I'm not upsetting anyone.

When everyone's hematocrit is 50 people are suspicious (as they should be). But, Lance's varies and you are still suspicious. It goes up in response to hypoxia (might happen in mountain stages). Granted this can take a week. But a more likely explanation for the observation that it was high after a mountain stage is that it also goes up in response to dehydration (and that happens quickly). Do we have data from another cyclist that doesn't change during that time frame to compare him to?

Also, I though we were just accusing him of using a drug that doesn't change the hematocrit.

John

definitely not upsetting me. I think he's generally accused of using any and all drugs he could get his hands on that would give him an edge, some of which affect hematocrit.

I find the whole lance armstrong thing, and the highly polarized opinions he seems to generate quite fascinating. I also still love watching old lance tour footage, he was a hell of a bike rider. Hell, Merckx is an admitted doper as well. Hinault, Indurain, Fingon,

Basso (interesting how he seems to get a free ticket back), Vino is villified, as is Ricco, but Millar showed more remorse and gets a 2nd chance. The chicken can't even find a ride now, but De Luca is back 9 months early for "cooperating" with doping officials. Contador.......I wonder how that one will play out.

Brad, I think all the other guys you mentioned are most likely dopers as well. I also like watching them ride bikes. I can take their performances with a grain of salt, and don't feel bad for the likes of mr clean as a whistle Boonen.

I'd say modern doping in U.S. cycling started here, with Eddy B: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htm

5-6 years later Eddy B got his hands on Lance. 20 years later, here we are.

4827north wrote:leave the Schlecks alone...

You mean you don't like my joke that they were siamese twins conjoined at the head and when they were separated they each got half the brain?

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/f ... ment-18842

Frank Schleck admits Fuentes payment
CSC-Saxo Bank has suspended Schleck from racing.

Luxembourg rider Frank Schleck has confirmed initial claims that he made a payment of nearly 7000 euros to a bank account belonging to Eufemiano Fuentes, a doctor at the centre of the Operacion Peurto doping scandal in 2006.

Whoa - what sort of post attacks twins! Anyways, you can do a lot with half a brain - it leaves one with half a wit to play with

Josh.E wrote:plus the former teammates who have been brought in and questioned by a grand jury and have allegedly said there was systemic doping

plus the stories of Landis

plus the stories of Hamilton

plus the "I fail to recollect" answers his ex wife gave when questioned under oath

plus the $100,000 "donation" lance made to the UCI right after alleged tour de suisse positives in 2002

plus the chasing down and threatening of simeoni when he threatened to speak publicly about doping in pro cycling

plus popo getting nailed with PEDs by federal investigators and documents linking armstrong to ferrari as recently as 2009, when he claimed no contact since 2004

plus taking a shower when investigators showed up in 2009 before providing a sample, even though he is mandated to stay in sight of the testers at all times after being informed of a doping control

plus the 2009 hematocrit level that mysteriously rises over the hardest days of the 2009 tour instead of slowly falling of, like would happen with human beings being subjected to exerting that much effort day after day

plus the "approved" steroid positive for "saddle sore cream"

plus armstrong's entourage threatening greg lemond

plus the fact that everybody was doing it at the time, and almost all of the 2nd through 10th place finishers from the armstrong era have been caught or later admitted to doping

the circumstantial evidence, both about his character, and about his probable doping goes on and on if you start doing any research

Excellent summary. But it still doesn't bother you? What if one of your kids turns out to be a good bike racer, makes it all the way to the protour, then gets told to dope? By a guy like Lance.

How about knowing that the international federation didn't even do the most basic things to limit it? (never mind the cutting edge testing).

And then they die in their sleep from some new genetic doping method? (Hormones will be passee by then.) By some sources, 30 guys died from epo before they figured it out.

This is educational, I'm enjoying it and I hope I'm not upsetting anyone.

Me too.