Recent content by henryg

Anyone in his position has knowledge of current doping even if it's true he is clean. If you are not going to really tell what you know and advance a real clean up of the sport then just shut up.

Actually the rate of crime in society is no were near as rampant as doping in cycling. It does not dominate life in the way doping dominates cycling.

Until Tygart's last investigation the same could have been said of the USA. Before Tygart -who was vilified by a large segment of US cycling- the US was as big a dope haven as Spain. At least the Spanish had Puerto, we had nothing before the Armstrong investigation which many in the US are still...

Walsh, LeMond and Kimmage storm the UCI.

I've always been a fan of Contador's but this just sounds like the old guard of dopers circling the wagons. If anything comes out of the ongoing controversy and investigations about him he's banned for life. I could see why he resents the attention the guys talking are creating. I wished...

No one is coming clean unless they have to. Even all the RS confessions claim all the doping ended in '06 :eek: Ranks are closing around the 'that was in the Lance era things are cleaner now' story and the UCI is figuring out how to jettison Lance and company and get back to business as usual.

Pointless speculation. There is absolutely no way to know. Maybe the top 10 guys would be none of the names anyone has mentioned. Might be guys who quit at the beginning of their careers because of doping. Guys who never got on the podium because EPO didn't work for them (natural Hematocrit to...

I'm curious about this. All other things being equal would an athlete with a natural HCT of 48 have an advantage over an athlete with an HCT of 40 in an endurance event sans blood doping?

I don't think the public enters into the decision making process. The pros are just playing by the rules. Not the rules as laid out by WADA and the ones publicly espoused by the UCI. The real rules -enforced by management and the UCI- far from the public eye. They didn't create the rules...

All the above. The doses and the effects are not what they were in the 90's so maybe today a clean cyclist might occasionally beat the dopers. In the 90's when the dopers where on rocket fuel, no chance. Doesn't mean doping isn't still rampant. Also the degree of improvement is all over the...

Completely useless speculation. It's possible Armstrong would have never made it onto a GT podium. Great GT champions like Anquetil, Bobet and Fignon exploded onto the scene right out of their teens. Armstrong showed no such GT promise. There might have been names we never heard of in the...

NO For the same reason that Armstrong declined to participate. They don't want to have to answer evidence in a formal hearing. They hope it all goes away fast. A hearing is the last thing they need.

I doubt it. To much money for potentially to little result. Armstrong is now history. He's been exposed as a cheat and liar. His record will be relegated. What cycling fans who want a clean sport should really be concerned about is the UCI. You can sanction a dozen Armstrongs and it won't...

The general public doesn't post in comment threads. According to Q scores Lance's negatives are 3 times his positives. It's something like 29% negative to 10% with a positive opinion. That's a big decline from a few years ago when it was 50/50 and it's likely to get a lot worse. So the spin is...

Armstrong already lost that suit in US courts. ASO doesn't want any more publicity around doping at the Tour then it already has. The UCI can't survive without Olympic revenue stream. The UCI and ASO just want this to go away as quickly as possible. If the route that does the least damage is...