8 Things On Lance Armstrong From The "Other Side Of The Grass"

[Hugh Januss]

I was thinking about that. It's interesting how the 1999 issue has become more important now than it was in 2005 when it first aired. At the time people thought "well we already knew what GC pros had to do to stay competitive in the 1990s, so it's not really news - what matters now is the future of the sport." But for somer reason its become the central issue of cycling for some reason even though it's now ten years ago.

If he would have had the good grace to stay retied and concentrate on banging starlets that looked like his mom, we wouldn't have to talk about him. But he is back, and according to his blood values from the tour, up to his old tricks again. Meanwhile the same old crap still comes from his mouth, most tested, never tested positive, if you doubt me you must love cancer, to which he has now added multi media psychological warfare aimed at a former teammate who happens to be the best stageracer in the world.
What's not to hate?

 

[Race Radio]

The haters top priority is to create a perception that things are worse than they are. They want CN readers to believe the majority hate LA. I can think of only a few notorious people in the history of civilization who deserve the terabites and millions of hours of worthless effort exclusively devoted to hating Armstrong. They talk about LA being not a nice person? The haters should be ashamed.

You have proclaimed yourself as the Arbiter of what is allowed to be written and what is not.

Is it OK to question Armstrong's involvement with Dr. Ferrari? Is someone a hater if they question Armstrong using the most notorious doping doctor in the sport?

Armstrong made a big show announcing his Catlin administered internal testing program. He asserted that he would be available for testing "Any time, anywhere" and promised "Complete transparency". When all of this turned out to be a lie is someone a hater for questioning this lie?

Armstrong wrote a book that portrayed him as a loyal family man. Even his most loyal groupies would question the fact that he cheated on the woman, Lisa Shiels, who stood by him through cancer. How a person a hater if they question this?

Armstrong promised "Complete transparency" and promised to post his values on the web. When these numbers made it obvious that he was once again blood doping he at first changed his numbers then took them off the web completely. How does questioning this deception make someone a hater?

I could go on for days, but something tells me it would be wasted on you.

 

[Cozy Beehive]

You have proclaimed yourself as the Arbiter of what is allowed to be written and what is not.

Is it OK to question Armstrong's involvement with Dr. Ferrari? Is someone a hater if they question Armstrong using the most notorious doping doctor in the sport?

Armstrong made a big show announcing his Catlin administered internal testing program. He asserted that he would be available for testing "Any time, anywhere" and promised "Complete transparency". When all of this turned out to be a lie is someone a hater for questioning this lie?

Armstrong wrote a book that portrayed him as a loyal family man. Even his most loyal groupies would question the fact that he cheated on the woman, Lisa Shiels, who stood by him through cancer. How a person a hater if they question this?

Armstrong promised "Complete transparency" and promised to post his values on the web. When these numbers made it obvious that he was once again blood doping he at first changed his numbers then took them off the web completely. How does questioning this deception make someone a hater?

I could go on for days, but something tells me it would be wasted on you.

RR :

About Lance changing his numbers bit. I never caught up with that, perhaps I was late to that story. Could you describe how he changed the numbers? So would this data on this website (appears to be from Livestrong), completely manipulated? I had this linked in my article and it'd be a shame if I'm linking to manipulated data.

http://cdn-community2.livestrong.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/9/10/c981f7be-e46c-4245-aa9d-d61ae110a264.Full.jpg

 

[Race Radio]

RR :

About Lance changing his numbers bit. I never caught up with that, perhaps I was late to that story. Could you describe how he changed the numbers? So would this data on this website (appears to be from Livestrong), completely manipulated? I had this linked in my article and it'd be a shame if I'm linking to manipulated data.

http://cdn-community2.livestrong.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/9/10/c981f7be-e46c-4245-aa9d-d61ae110a264.Full.jpg

When Armstrong released his numbers the Hct test on 2/4 was 45.8. This stood out.

Not only was is a big increase from his off season baseline of 39 but it also was taken during a period of heavy racing (TDU) and a training camp were he rode close to 30 hours in a week (According to his Twitter). This number was quickly questioned. With the next release of his numbers this number, and others, were revised down. The Hct result on 2/4 was now changed to 43.1.

When his numbers from the Tour were questioned because of the unexplainable increase in the third week he took them down all together.

So much for "Complete Transparency"

 

[Cozy Beehive]

When Armstrong released his numbers the Hct test on 2/4 was 45.8. This stood out.

Not only was is a big increase from his off season baseline of 39 but it also was taken during a period of heavy racing (TDU) and a training camp were he rode close to 30 hours in a week (According to his Twitter). This number was quickly questioned. With the next release of his numbers this number, and others, were revised down. The Hct result on 2/4 was now changed to 43.1.

When his numbers from the Tour were questioned because of the unexplainable increase in the third week he took them down all together.

So much for "Complete Transparency"

[Hits hand on head]

This is interesting. Do you have the original uploaded somewhere? I think it goes to show that I've been missing a lot previously, just because I was hardly interested in knowing what he was upto.

In the manipulated data, it looks like he just changed Hematocrit value while everything else stays the same on the same row of data. I'll be hard pressed to believe that other values shown in the table do not vary when crit value is changed. Armstrong must surely not know what he was doing. And then he takes this offline? But it does seem like the link I gave you is active, so where is that uploaded?

 

[Race Radio]

[Hits hand on head]

This is interesting. Do you have the original uploaded somewhere? I think it goes to show that I've been missing a lot previously, just because I was hardly interested in knowing what he was upto.

In the manipulated data, it looks like he just changed Hematocrit value while everything else stays the same on the same row of data. I'll be hard pressed to believe that other values shown in the table do not vary when crit value is changed. Armstrong must surely not know what he was doing. And then he takes this offline? But it does seem like the link I gave you is active, so where is that uploaded?

What I posted is the original. I saved it when he first posted it on his site. Given Armstrong's habit of revisionist history it seemed like a good idea at the time.

 

[Cozy Beehive]

Blood Data Availibility

What I posted is the original. I saved it when he first posted it on his site. Given Armstrong's habit of revisionist history it seemed like a good idea at the time.

What I'm slightly irked about right now is not having another pro-tour racer's blood profile to compare Armstrong's with, during the same period. It would be really interesting to see what someone like Contador showed. But I think Wiggins published his didn't he? Now is there any place his data was uploaded, if yes would you point me to it? I'm trying to see if I can run a simple control chart analysis to see how the data points behaved but it'd be sort of useless with just one racer's values. Most of the critics out there say crit value is supposed to drop during a hard event such as the Tour and just seeing Armstrong's values completely steady during that one month period with lowest reticulocyte values points out to me that this requires a more serious study.

 

[Race Radio]

What I'm slightly irked about right now is not having another pro-tour racer's blood profile to compare Armstrong's with, during the same period. It would be really interesting to see what someone like Contador showed. But I think Wiggins published his didn't he? Now is there any place his data was uploaded, if yes would you point me to it? I'm trying to see if I can run a simple control chart analysis to see how the data points behaved but it'd be sort of useless with just one racer's values. Most of the critics out there say crit value is supposed to drop during a hard event such as the Tour and just seeing Armstrong's values completely steady during that one month period with lowest reticulocyte values points out to me that this requires a more serious study.

Armstrong's numbers were more then steady, they went up 10% from his off season baseline.

The UCI has the numbers, but only release them at the request of the Athlete. Basso posted his numbers. IIRC his highest Hct came right before the Giro....funny how that happens

 

[Murray]

Fact is that members of the US Junior team, doped by CC, got seriously ill. Fignon himself has spoken about his cancer being brought on by PED usage.

This point comes up again and again and it's really not proof of anything.

It is true that steroids (like all immune-supressing drugs) give a small increase the chance that someone will get cancer.

However, just because someone using steroids gets cancer does not mean that the steroids caused the cancer. Testicular cancer is the most common cancer in young men, so pro cyclists being in that group, it should not be too surprising that a few get this disease.

There is no link in the medical literature that I can find that links steroid use to pancreatic cancer in the case of Fignon.

 

[Race Radio]

This point comes up again and again and it's really not proof of anything.

It is true that steroids (like all immune-supressing drugs) give a small increase the chance that someone will get cancer.

However, just because someone using steroids gets cancer does not mean that the steroids caused the cancer. Testicular cancer is the most common cancer in young men, so pro cyclists being in that group, it should not be too surprising that a few get this disease.

There is no link in the medical literature that I can find that links steroid use to pancreatic cancer in the case of Fignon.

I see your point, and it has value. The challenge is this case all 5 riders suffered from complications that are directly linked to the human parvo virus, a usually benign infection that can cause major problems if a patient is suffering from a compromised immune system. Cortisone is well known as a immune suppresent. It is hard to ignore the possible link with such a narrow sample.

 

[Casa de Hombre]

What I posted is the original. I saved it when he first posted it on his site. Given Armstrong's habit of revisionist history it seemed like a good idea at the time.

How do we know you did not change those values with photoshop just to make something up?

Also how do you keep getting that 500,000.00 dollar amount donated to the UCI? The amount has never been documented yes or no? If yes then where is the document to prove that?

Cozy try not to belive everything YOU put up on the internet.

 

[red_flanders]

How do we know you did not change those values with photshop just to make something up?

You don't. The fact that the same exact point was noticed and brought up on every cycling forum on the web, both in english and other languages might suggest it wasn't.

Also the consider fact that everyone linked to his values as soon as they went up. A lot of people pointed out that they indeed looked odd. When they changed, a LOT of people noticed. I watched it happen in real time on the web. It's a fair question, but it's not what happened. Not at all.

Also how do you keep getting that 500,000.00 dollar amount donated to the UCI? The amount has never been documented yes or no? If yes then where is the document to prove that?

Sylvia Schenck of the UCI made the claim. I have seen no bank documents to prove it. I have seen several people go on the record, including Armstrong that it was a very large donation. I see no reason to doubt Schenck. I see every reason to doubt those who are making very vague statements about the amount, including a lot of "I don't remember".

 

[Casa de Hombre]

Well if they are not up on the internet then one can not believe it. Just because a bunch of Message board people from all over the world said they saw it in real time does not make it true. I did not see it so does that make it false? Prove it that all I am asking. I doubt you can.

The amount paid to the UCI is a fabricated story. The amount was not that large. It is just another myth created by the self proclaimed “haters”.

 

[poupou]

How do we know you did not change those values with photoshop just to make something up?

Also how do you keep getting that 500,000.00 dollar amount donated to the UCI? The amount has never been documented yes or no? If yes then where is the document to prove that?

Cozy try not to belive everything YOU put up on the internet.

We are familar not to believe what Lance put on internet or what he says...

The around half-million was confirmed by Schenk, UCI (Velonews -sept 2005)

 

[BYOP88]

Well if they are not up on the internet then one can not believe it. Just because a bunch of Message board people from all over the world said they saw it in real time does not make it true. I did not see it so does that make it false? Prove it that all I am asking. I doubt you can.

The amount paid to the UCI is a fabricated story. The amount was not that large. It is just another myth created by the self proclaimed “haters”.

Doesn't really matter if the amount was large or small, the UCI shouldn't have accepted it for many reasons, It would be like the IRS accepting a cash donation from a company.

Wait I don't think the "haters" created it, cos King Uniballer even said he gave money to the UCI but then he lies alot so......

 

[Casa de Hombre]

We are familar not to believe what Lance put on internet or what he says...

The around half-million was confirmed by Schenk, UCI (Velonews -sept 2005)

Hey fab is that a HE or a SHE in your Avatar? Looks like a Pat.

Who is this Schenk person? Do they still work at the UCI? Lets get someone at cycling news to call them up for an interview. Lets see what they say now?

 

[Casa de Hombre]

Doesn't really matter if the amount was large or small, the UCI shouldn't have accepted it for many reasons, It would be like the IRS accepting a cash donation from a company.

Wait I don't think the "haters" created it, cos King Uniballer even said he gave money to the UCI but then he lies alot so......

Why name call (King Uniballer)?

I see your point but the fact remains that the amount of money donated to the UCI keeps getting larger. If we wait until next year it will have risen to around 750 thousand, two more years and we will have a full million.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Hey fab is that a HE or a SHE in your Avatar? Looks like a Pat.

Who is this Schenk person? Do they still work at the UCI? Lets get someone at cycling news to call them up for an interview. Lets see what they say now?

Please refrain from the personal comments, House.

Sylvia Schenk was president of the German cycling federation from 2001 to 2004.

Susan

 

[Casa de Hombre]

Please refrain from the personal comments, House.

Sylvia Schenk was president of the German cycling federation from 2001 to 2004.

Susan

See then I guess there is no chance to get her to comment on the actual amount that was donated to the UCI? How does someone in Germany know what Lance donated in 1999? She was in from 2001 to 2004 but has inside information on what was going on then it would be nice to hear something from her. Why is she so quiet now.

The comment was not about fab but about his avatar. My apologies if you took it personal.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

. Why is she so quiet now.

Probably because no one is asking her. And I have no intention of doing so just to please you.

Susan

PS. Avatars are personal.

 

[Casa de Hombre]

Probably because no one is asking her. And I have no intention of doing so just to please you.

Susan

PS. Avatars are personal.

Well maybe not you but maybe someone else can phone her up and find out the scoop? This would be a major story for Cycling News to break. The inside information about the amount of money donated to the UCI and what was the perceived intention of the donation? Not just for me but for the “haters”. They would also like to see a story like that.

 

[Race Radio]

Well maybe not you but maybe someone else can phone her up and find out the scoop? This would be a major story for Cycling News to break. The inside information about the amount of money donated to the UCI and what was the perceived intention of the donation? Not just for me but for the “haters”. They would also like to see a story like that.

It is old news. She has covered it in many articles which I am sure you have seen.

 

[Casa de Hombre]

It is old news. She has covered it in many articles which I am sure you have seen.

Well I have not seen or read them but I will go and try to find them since according to you they exist.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Well maybe not you but maybe someone else can phone her up and find out the scoop? This would be a major story for Cycling News to break. The inside information about the amount of money donated to the UCI and what was the perceived intention of the donation? Not just for me but for the “haters”. They would also like to see a story like that.

Sylvia Schnek was the head of the Ethics Committee of the UCI - so I am sure she has some idea of their finances and how they are obtained.

Wouldn't the question of how much be better placed to Lance, Verbruggen or McQuaid?
They could also ask them why it an acceptable practice to have 'donations' between an athlete and their sporting authority.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Well I have not seen or read them but I will go and try to find them since according to you they exist.

Sylvia Schenk (former UCI member)
• "There is obviously a strong
relationship with Armstrong,"
Schenk added. "The UCI took
a lot of money from
Armstrong - to my knowledge
500,000 dollars - and now
there is speculation that there
are financial connections to
Armstrong, as well as the
American market.”
-Velonews, Sept 2005
Bill Stapleton (agent/manager)
• He -- yes, he gave a donation
to the UCI three or four years
ago. I think he's done that
maybe once or twice, with a -
- with a request to refine the --
I believe -- we'd need to look
at the letter, but I believe it
was to further do research
into the EPO test.
-deposition, Sept 2005