There's been a lot of doping smoke around Lance Armstong's career, so my guess is that there is indeed fire there. (Again, that's doping smoke, not dope smoke) I suppose Tyler Hamilton, Floyd Landis and Frankie Andreu all could have axes to grind or other incentives to make false claims, but I doubt it. Lance's repeated reference the lack of a positive test is not exculpatory since it's not possible to test for a lot of the drugs and doping methods he's accused of. I think Lance and those around him are smart enough to stay ahead of the game with doping How many top riders have been busted after leaving a team with him? From everything I've heard and read, the whole peloton was on EPO in the late 90s. Lance is superhuman, but he's not a machine. To do what he did in a field where performance enhancer use was rampant he had to have doped. Just my two cents. I will give lance once thing, he always has good lawyers working for him.
Hamilton sure did blink and look away a lot. I don't know if he was lying, perhaps he was telling partial truths, but his body language wasn't what you would expect to see from someone telling the truth.
I won't get into whether or not Lance was involved in doping because there's no point; either you believe him or you don't. Nothing has ever been proven and his camp's claims about all the tests he's been administered and passed are correct, but there are also a number of former associates who directly implicate him. What I did find interesting in the article I read about Hamilton's new claims is what he said about his own usage, and the pervasiveness of doping in general. Many have always claimed it's the exception rather than the rule, and Hamilton has basically stated the entire pelaton was using, and that he had no chance of being competitive otherwise. I do wonder why, if almost the entire field is doping, only a handful fail tests every year? Is the testing technology really that bad, or far behind, or incapable of detecting masking techniques? If the athletes are so far ahead of the game that 99% get away with doping, what's the point of even testing? I just don't understand, and perhaps never will. What I don't like (and this isn't a defense of Lance because for all I know he doped along with everyone else) is when someone comes forward only at opportune moments, or when they themselves are under fire. In the case of Landis he only made accusations about others after he was caught, and stripped of his Tour de France title. And Tyler is coming forward eleven years after the fact, when he has a new book coming out and is in the process of promoting it. I don't know if what he says is true or not, but one thing is for certain. Almost no one would have read, or bought a book by Tyler Hamilton without some kind of blockbuster revelations included. I mean, who cares otherwise except for a handful of diehard fans. I used to believe, perhaps naively, that doping was a rare occurence in general, and those who cheated were almost always caught at some point. In recent years I've done almost a complete turnaround and now feel it's probably an issue in most sports. I think there are a lot more athletes in golf, tennis, track, cycling, football, baseball - you name it - than most of us ever realized, or thought possible. Very sad IMO because we'll never really know who the truly great ones are, regardless of the discipline.
I do think there is a high dose (no pun intended) of opportunism in the "revelations" about Lance made by everyone. The revelations are all ex post facto and come, in just about every instance, after the accuser himself was busted, i.e. Landis, Andreau, Hamilton, etc. They all found religion after they got busted and right before they started lining up book deals and television appearances. I remember be Tyler Hamilton's vigorous protestations of innocence when he tested positive while leading the Phonak team, the arbitration he vigorously pursued, the second positive test for banned substance, the 2004 Olympic Gold medal in doubt, and now his conversion. Same with Landis and Andreau - all lied repeatedly about doping, got busted, then pointed fingers. Hamilton's shifty-eyed revelation that he allegedly saw Lance use EPO over ten years ago was hardly convincing. The one person who, in my mind, would deal a serious blow to Lance's credibility if he corroborated any doping allegations is George Hincapie. He's been relatively quiet, but he's never, to this date, corroborated any doping allegation. Lance deserves, and should get, the benefit of any doubt.
The bizarre chain of events continues with Tyler Hamilton surrendering his 2004 Olympic Gold Medal. In reply to:
really, you're going to complain about ex post facto? you expect people who are in the peloton to confess "ab initio" and implicate themselves before racing? And I bet you believe Barry Bonds didn't use steroids....(frankly, Jans Ulrich (eternally 2nd to Lance) probably did dope, Marco Patani doped, and then toss in Andreu, Landis and Hamilton). The Link PS Now Hincapie is saying Armstrong doped. Is that enough of a final straw? Or is he "selling Lance" down the river? Wake up and smell the coffee...
My belief is that many of these top guys were doping, and have been doping. There have seemingly always been ways to beat the tests, and the top guys in the sport have the know how to circumvent the system. That being said, if Lance was doping so was a good portion of the field, which means he was still winning against other guys doping. It's not like he had an unfair advantage against other competitors. What if Barry Bonds and Mark McGuire were doping but Sammy Sosa wasn't? Then Sammy would have a beef against the other two. Does anyone doubt all 3 of those guys were doping? Then the beef wasn't in who was doping and got the single season records, but rather who was doping and setting all time records against those who weren't. That is my take. Lance doped in a doping era and with all the dopers was the best of the doped.
Impossible. I’ve read over and over on this board that Lance is totally pure and clean, possibly the only one in bicycle racing who is. Besides, he rode his bike on the field during halftime of a UT game. What more proof of being clean could anyone ask for? Since bicycle racing seems to be about as honest as a game of NY three card Monty, shouldn’t they just open things up? Make an “unlimited” class, sort of like auto racing where anything goes. You could call it the “Tour de Drug”, and allow, nay, require drug using during the match. Bicycle racers could gain an advantage not only in having the best drugs, but in their drug using technique. Such as, those who could inject their *** cheeks with drugs whist cycling, without losing a stroke, would be at an advantage over those who had to stop to inject horse hormones or someone else’s blood into their body. And the bike builders would have another avenue for their engineering prowess. They could design aerodynamic IV bags that would slide through the wind, and thus not slow the bike down while the bag flowed drugs into the body of the cyclist. Why anyone bothers to watch this drug-infested, crooked, silly “sport” is beyond me.
msdw no one is saying cycling isn't tough. Every sport at the top level of competition is tough or it would not be a sport. The issue is the doping to gain a competitive advantage is against all sporting values.
The "everybody does it" excuse strikes again. Is Tyler Hamilton from Oklahoma? Show me the proof or shut up. Don't they save the samples and retest years later when better testing techniques are found? And they still haven't caught Lance Armstrong? Maybe he did some PED's early or even later in his career, but it is impossible to prove you didn't do any of these things. Many of the accusers have ulterior motives, and I don't know if I can believe them. Some people are more than willing to lie about someone else in order to make themselves look good. But the bottom line is, the federal government should not be leading a multi-million dollar witch hunt for Lance Armstrong's scalp, as we all found out in the Barry Bonds case. It is a waste of taxpayer dollars. The sport should regulate the sport.
I really don't have much of an opinion on Lance's innocence, but I'm comfortable with the idea that he is smarter (and therefore could be a better cheater) than the others. The fact that he dated Cheryl Crow belies that notion. BTW, water polo is considered by many sports physiologists to be the most demanding sport of them all.
I'm not enough to do either speed walking OR water polo. Never was, never will be. Haven't done much research, but if you slack off for a bit in water polo you GET bit and then you drown.
It's all ********. Let 'em take whatever drugs they want, whether it makes 'em bigger and faster, or just stupid enough to drive, run, ride, ski, skate, jump or whatever way, way too fast, too high, too often. You "purity" ******* blow smoke all you want about purity and immoral competitive edges, but the bottom line is that the vast majority of the people whose money winds up paying for professional sports don't give a damn about your purity... they want to have those "Wow!!!" moments, like when some guy elevates eleven feet off the floor and swats a basketball into the third tier of seats, and on the way back down, his heart bursts out of his chest like the Alien, and sprays blood everywhere. It doesn't matter to those "fans" whether that happens because of freaky genetic combinations or the latest in Chinese medical science, as long as it happens. Don't believe me? Break the sport of your choice into the "pure" league and the "druggie" league, and see who sells more tickets and adverts.
