• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Cycling thread

I get the impression Armstrong treated as a game, where the only moral was not to fail the flipping tests.

These American superheroes, they fall so far. OJ, Tiger, Armstrong, Marion Jones, Tyson.
 
jts1882 said:
We have to remember that the UCI opposed serious drug testing for a long time and only recently allowed meaningful tests. There was a whole generation (possibly more) where drugs were the norm and where the teams had to be in on it. Without checking, I think every Tour de France winner between Indurain and Wiggins has tested positive for something or has strong suspicion against him (except maybe Evans?). We can only hope that the era is over and the number of cheats is now a small minority. Unfortunately, we will always be suspicious that they have move on to something that the testers can't detect.
Click to expand...

Only 2 that weren't instigated in doping so far are Evans and Sastre. But Sastre is heavily suspected Evans much less, he might be clean.
Of the rest its interesting how many of them never got a positive test. Landis and Contador are the only two that were found with chemicals in their blood. Riis was never caught but came out and admitted he doped years later. Pantani and Ulrich were brought down by a criminal investigation into a doping network. Pantini's name also turned up that investigation but he was dead by then, he had only been banned because his hematocrit levels in his blood were above 50%.
The 2003 race is a stand out - 7 of the riders who finished in the top 10 that year have been done for something since!
 
Last edited:
Amusing how all the haters and non-believers sit there all smug behing their twitter handles with the 'I told you so' attitude. Yes I'm talking about you @dingdonginsontimes.
I suppose it's far easier to justify your own bone idleness (as Wiggins would say) to have a sporting great knocked down a peg or two. I mean perish the thought that somebody achieves something with their lives!

Had LA fought this case and won, the USADA would only come up with a new case next year, the the year after. When will it end?
What's the point in having drug tests if the powers that be accept one word against another?

It must pain the authorities that LA has never failed a drug test, bit inconvenient that for them.
 
T Bone said:
It must pain the authorities that LA has never failed a drug test, bit inconvenient that for them.
Click to expand...

He did fail drug tests, but there were technicalities. He failed one for corticosteroids but got a retrospective medical certificate. A Paris lab tested an old blood sample positive for EPO. There are reports of other suspicious tests (e.g. "blood manipulation") that would have been part of the evidence.

As already mentioned, you also have to remember than many admitted drug cheats never failed a test (e.g. Riise. Marion Jones). With a doping scheme run by the teams they would monitor everything so that the existing tests could be passed.
 
Last edited:
jts1882 said:
He did fail drug tests, but there were technicalities. He failed one for corticosteroids but got a retrospective medical certificate. A Paris lab tested an old blood sample positive for EPO. There are reports of other suspicious tests (e.g. "blood manipulation") that would have been part of the evidence.

As already mentioned, you also have to remember than many admitted drug cheats never failed a test (e.g. Riise. Marion Jones). With a doping scheme run by the teams they would monitor everything so that the existing tests could be passed.
Click to expand...
A Paris lab tested an old sample. Right and can the integrity of that sample be accounted for? Why didn't it show up in earlier tests?
The corticosteroids is a drug used to treat inflammation iirc. Prolonged use can lead to weight gain and muscle weakness. Hardly the drug of choice for a cycling cheat is it?
And if his medical team did everything in their powers and skills to ensure he passed his tests, the why not do the same for the likes of Tyler Hamilton and floyd landis et al?

I read a comment earlier which sums the whole situation nicely. It's a bit like blowing 0.0 on a breathalyser but having your driving licence revoked anyway because your mates all say they saw you drinking 5 pints in the pub beforehand.
 
T Bone said:
A Paris lab tested an old sample. Right and can the integrity of that sample be accounted for? Why didn't it show up in earlier tests?
The corticosteroids is a drug used to treat inflammation iirc. Prolonged use can lead to weight gain and muscle weakness. Hardly the drug of choice for a cycling cheat is it?
And if his medical team did everything in their powers and skills to ensure he passed his tests, the why not do the same for the likes of Tyler Hamilton and floyd landis et al?

I read a comment earlier which sums the whole situation nicely. It's a bit like blowing 0.0 on a breathalyser but having your driving licence revoked anyway because your mates all say they saw you drinking 5 pints in the pub beforehand.
Click to expand...

Because if Armstrong had failed a test the sport and all the new money he brought to the sport would be finished until they cleaned themselves up.
Armstrong made two famous payments to the UCI of 25k and 100k in 2002 and 2005 - http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-reveals-armstrong-made-two-donations-to-the-uci

But ultimately you can believe what you want.
I dislike the guy for his bullying behaviour.
Armstrong's chasedown of Filippo Simeoni was the ugliest most hateful thing I've ever seen in sport.

http://www.bicycling.com/news/pro-cycling/armstrong-hunts-down-rider

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taWGQNKUgQQ
 
dawaxman said:
Best advice I can give is to make sure you give all options a good ride first...all bikes are slightly different shapes etc. I love my specialized and found giants uncomfortable...all personal taste, but most bike shops will let you take the bike out for a spin...

I recommend cycle surgery, then once you have chosen your bike, look it up on wiggle and cycle surgery will price match it. Benefit being you will have a local shop that sold you the bike who will give you advice on extra bits in the future...

Imo you'd be better off spending a little less on the bike and making sure you have money for good helmet, shoes, glasses, bibs etc
Click to expand...

thank you, good advice. appreciate that.
 
You've got wonder about Lance's former teammates coming out and attempting to give evidence against him. What have they got to gain? There would be no point in them trying to take on Armstrong if they knew that he was clean, as he's such a powerful figure within the sport. Armstrong managed to win seven straight tours in cycling's most drug-riddled era, that in itself says something.
 
I'm still not 100% convinced of his guilt (I know how naive that sounds), but the USADA seem to have such a hatred for him that they'll be claiming he didn't beat cancer next
 
galeforce said:
I'm still not 100% convinced of his guilt (I know how naive that sounds), but the USADA seem to have such a hatred for him that they'll be claiming he didn't beat cancer next
Click to expand...

His best friend in cycling George Hincapie was lined up the testify against him. Armstrong said Hincapie was "like a brother" to him.
Hincapie's evidence will still come out'.
Also its widely known he failed 8 different tests but none of them ever stuck. The corticosteroids one on the tour in 1999. The 6 epo ones from 1999 when they retested them in 2004. And the 2001 epo out of competition test he failed but was just given a warning for by the UCI.
 
Modric THFC said:
His best friend in cycling George Hincapie was lined up the testify against him. Armstrong said Hincapie was "like a brother" to him.
Hincapie's evidence will still come out'.
Also its widely known he failed 8 different tests but none of them ever stuck. The corticosteroids one on the tour in 1999. The 6 epo ones from 1999 when they retested them in 2004. And the 2001 epo out of competition test he failed but was just given a warning for by the UCI.
Click to expand...
I can't remember who it was (might have been the WADA), but an organisation asked for the results of tests for an 'unknown cyclist's' tests - many believe it was Armstrong. The person who did the test could only identify him by the patient number - but there were numerous testosterone-epitestosterone levels that were abnormally high. The only results missing was 1997 (the year Lance was out of competition and undergoing treatment for cancer).

Grainy, but there are loads of cases like this against him.
 
I know it doesn't look good, my main reason for not believing it is that I don't want it to be true, I'm clutching at straws
 
galeforce said:
I'm still not 100% convinced of his guilt (I know how naive that sounds), but the USADA seem to have such a hatred for him that they'll be claiming he didn't beat cancer next
Click to expand...
Why do they have such a stance though? He's an American athlete, it's hardly like they would be so vociferous in pursuing him if they didn't think there was any substance to the claims. I can't see anything else other than Lance being a cheat, so many stories out there about him - and let's not forget that he won seven tours in a row in the sport's most drug-riddled era, against a peloton full of dopers.

It's a shame that someone I used to admire should be tainted in such a fashion, but if the sport is to truly progress then it has to be this way.
 
No credit given to Sarah Storey in this thread? Maybe that's just because there's already an Olympics thread in place? But as a Gold winning cyclist, I thought she merited a mention in this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back