Armstrong leader of Astana at TDF

[lostintime]

Lance Fanbys are so funny. They just cannot stand their guy taking EPO fundamentally changed what he was capable of, so they lash out at other riders. Well, they lash out when they are not making the ridiculous claim that all dope is the same so it does not matter what Armstrong took.

I couldn't care less if anyone takes drugs or not. That said..... the influence of drugs on performance is relative to the time period taken. What they take is minor compared to the intent to cheat. Whatever they took in the 60's made them better than those that didn't. Same for the 70's, 80's, etc.

The point is.... it doesn't matter what the drug of choice of the time is. Intending to boost performance by artificial means..... is the real issue. Weather Armstrong took X or Merckx Y ...... it doesn't matter as the intent is the same. A cheat is a cheat.

Oh hell.... I don't know if that's coming out right. Such is life.

 

[Parrot23]

Anyone see the tee-shirt Lance was wearing in his LiveStrong video this AM before the TT? Words on the front were: "100% back". A not so subtle hint for some rivals.

His ride today must have changed a lot of the calculus for the TDF, and that's with a broken shoulder 6wks ago.

Is Menchov riding the TDF, too?

 

[slowoldman]

..... the influence of drugs on performance is relative to the time period taken. What they take is minor compared to the intent to cheat. Whatever they took in the 60's made them better than those that didn't. Same for the 70's, 80's, etc.

The point is.... it doesn't matter what the drug of choice of the time is. Intending to boost performance by artificial means..... is the real issue. Weather Armstrong took X or Merckx Y ...... it doesn't matter as the intent is the same. A cheat is a cheat.

Oh hell.... I don't know if that's coming out right. Such is life.

I have heard this argument somewhere before......

You are 100% correct lostintime.

 

[gatete]

What a joke. I am belittling Merckx? He is a hero of mine - he is class. Following cycling since 1982, I understand the rich history of the Euro scene, and could not have MORE respect for the long line of my cycling heros. The issue is more about the fact that you continuously pound Lance in such a sophomoric and tiresome manner that you are becoming a bore. Read back through your posts.

You were wrong about Lance's fitness - you will be wrong in the event that Bertie is the stronger of the two. But please continue to issue your proclamations.

I am a Lance fan, but he is FAR from my favorite rider (Cav, VdV, many others).

I understand where you're coming from, I too have my favorites and even sometimes had a subjective support for the likes of Basso or even the Doping innuendos about my favorite rider A/C but Lance.... men he really doesn't help it, I mean I was a great story back when back, but dating 2003 and beyond it became imposible to like this dude, arrogant, selfish. I really hope he gets his *** kicked that will be a good closing for a story that had a wonderful beggining in 1999.

 

[jaylew]

Highly unlikely that I mentioned Davis as a credible candidate for the Giro as I tend not to get involved in the tipster game - I'm a well known KoDer

From the Early Giro Predictions thread:

You also need to take a look at exactly how many teams are fielding a credible GC candidate:

Aqua e Sapone: Garzelli
AG2R: Gadret
Astana: Leipheimer
Caisse: ?
Cervelo: Sastre
Garmin: ?
ISD: ?
Lampre: Cunego
Liquigas: Basso
LPR: Di Luca
QS: Davis
Rabo: Menchov
Serramenti: Simoni
Lotto/Katusha/Saxobank/Xacobeo: ?

I'd also argue whether it's 'moronic' to compare the riders of Merckx's era with those of Armstrong's - an interesting debate to be had about developments in the sport versus the 'old days' and one that doesn't even touch on the D word, perhaps, but not for this forum, enjoyable as it is.

Debate about the developments in the sport, fine. It's when people start trying to decide who's "better" that it becomes problematic. You hear the same stuff in every sport - people trying to compare Babe Ruth, Wilt Chamberlain, Bobby Jones, or Rod Laver to athletes today. If the timeframe is close, cool, but when you've got decades separating people it's just pointless. I do realize I'm in the minority because people love to make those "best of all time" lists.

 

[Leopejo]

What contemporaries of Armstrong didn't?

If everyone changed their potential then the one with the greatest potential still won, right?

Many would argue that this is not the case. Different courses fit different riders, maybe different doping levels too.

 

[Leopejo]

Lance isn't "my guy" by any means, but one needs to at least glance at reality.

The reality is that almost all of Lance's contemporaries were busted for dope, while he was not.

Now, he indeed may have been on EPO in '99, but the evidence is non-condemning, so it's at best a maybe.

He also may have been on something undetectable, but, again, there is no proof.

One can speculate all day long, and come up with a variety of scenarios, but the fact remains that Lance was either clean, or smart enough to outsmart the people who's job it was to bust him.

Actually, there is plenty of proof, decisive proof. More proof than, for example, in Marco Pantani's case.

 

[bianchigirl]

My list also mentions Gadret who seems to be entirely MIA. Whilst I appreciate the fact that you trawled through all my posts to prove a point, I feel it's somewhat obsessive (and entirely misses the point of the original post but since the level of comprehension around here often beggars belief that's only to be expected )

So we can't make a comparison of Merckx to Armstrong because the eras have 'moved on' - sorry, not buying that for a minute - next you'll be telling me that Beloki was a greater rider than Ocana

Leo, absolutely agreed - I direct anyone to the Ashenden interview. There is a great deal of credible proof - perhaps jay would like to talk to Betsy Andreu about what she heard in that hospital room?

On topic: my list of the GC contenders for the Giro mentions Leipheimer as team leader. Would the board agree that he is a 'credible' GC contender/leader after the TT?

 

[53x11 in DC]

I couldn't care less if anyone takes drugs or not. That said..... the influence of drugs on performance is relative to the time period taken. What they take is minor compared to the intent to cheat. Whatever they took in the 60's made them better than those that didn't. Same for the 70's, 80's, etc.

The point is.... it doesn't matter what the drug of choice of the time is. Intending to boost performance by artificial means..... is the real issue. Weather Armstrong took X or Merckx Y ...... it doesn't matter as the intent is the same. A cheat is a cheat.

Oh hell.... I don't know if that's coming out right. Such is life.

a great post - well said.

 

[53x11 in DC]

On topic: my list of the GC contenders for the Giro mentions Leipheimer as team leader. Would the board agree that he is a 'credible' GC contender/leader after the TT?

Boy, that Leipheimer pick of yours was a REAL stretch!! Going WAY out on a limb!!

Teasing. But as a fan of Levi since his Northern California head honcho days, I haven't seen him put the nail in the coffin against the top-level competition he faces here. Can he put Mechov in difficulty? Probably. Concerned about him even being able to take 7 seconds from DiLuca. (Though, DiLuca has blown massively before).

 

[Pietro]

My list also mentions Gadret who seems to be entirely MIA. Whilst I appreciate the fact that you trawled through all my posts to prove a point, I feel it's somewhat obsessive (and entirely misses the point of the original post but since the level of comprehension around here often beggars belief that's only to be expected )

So we can't make a comparison of Merckx to Armstrong because the eras have 'moved on' - sorry, not buying that for a minute - next you'll be telling me that Beloki was a greater rider than Ocana

Leo, absolutely agreed - I direct anyone to the Ashenden interview. There is a great deal of credible proof - perhaps jay would like to talk to Betsy Andreu about what she heard in that hospital room?

On topic: my list of the GC contenders for the Giro mentions Leipheimer as team leader. Would the board agree that he is a 'credible' GC contender/leader after the TT?

In spite of JB yelling in his ear, he is a meek rider unless he is doing a TT. I doubt he will attack, attack to try to get into the pink, he likes to sit in and be happy with a lower step on the podium. DiLuca, who is NOT going to the TdF, is hungry, Italian, has nothing to lose so expect him to be aggressive, more so than Levi. Menchov has no team. He is going to try to stay with DiLuca by himself.

DiLuca is the man for this edition of the best race of the year.

 

[Parrot23]

In spite of JB yelling in his ear, he is a meek rider unless he is doing a TT. I doubt he will attack, attack to try to get into the pink, he likes to sit in and be happy with a lower step on the podium.

Hard to disagree with this. I was hoping Lance's pugnacious presence would affect Levi and chivvy him up, get him thinking like Cav, i.e. a little offensive at times.

You just have to look at the little dogs Levi and his wife take around with them (little toy-like poodles). He should get a pitbull (which I hate, by the way, LOL) and think aggressive.

It's why I think Horner's loss is a big one. He's a creative guy on the road who can think and go with opportunities/punches as they occur. He could spot any opportunities against di Luca--IF there are going to be any.

Irony: Astana need Alberto now. Talk about a rider who can put the "fear of God", or whatever, into opponents. You can bet Di Luca and Menchov would be pretty nervous with AC around. Attacks like a sledgehammer--and isn't scared to fail while trying.

 

[BroDeal]

I couldn't care less if anyone takes drugs or not. That said..... the influence of drugs on performance is relative to the time period taken. What they take is minor compared to the intent to cheat. Whatever they took in the 60's made them better than those that didn't. Same for the 70's, 80's, etc.

The point is.... it doesn't matter what the drug of choice of the time is. Intending to boost performance by artificial means..... is the real issue. Weather Armstrong took X or Merckx Y ...... it doesn't matter as the intent is the same. A cheat is a cheat.

The effect of the dope is the issue. Like everything in life there are shades of gray. Different drugs have differing amounts of effectiveness. It is easy to google research for various products and see that EPO and blood transfusions are totally different than amphetamines and steroids. They are not even in the same ballpark.

In the closing minutes of a basketball team, if one team deliberately fouls an opposing player to force the other team throw the ball in from the sides and possibly turn over the ball then that is one thing. If the same team decides to have a player deliberately injure another to force him out of the game thenn that is a completely different matter. Both are against the rules. Both are cheating. According to you and slowoldman, the two forms of cheating are equivalent; but you would be hard pressed to find others with the same view.

Doctor assisted blood doping is light years beyond anything that was being done in the 70s. It has destroyed all trust in the arrangement of the results. The rider who placed twentieth in the TdF may very well have won it in an undoped peleton. The results are worthless.

I have no doubt that Merckx would have won multiple GTs in an undoped peloton. I don't think Armstrong would have ever placed in the top ten of the TdF. Riders have won things doped in the EPO era that they never would have won if the sport were clean. That is why the different kinds of doping are different.

 

[BroDeal]

Now, he indeed may have been on EPO in '99, but the evidence is non-condemning, so it's at best a maybe.

He had artificial EPO in six of his urine samples. There is no maybe about it. He doped.

It also makes no sense to think that after using EPO in 1999, he stopped doing and performed even better.

 

[Captain Chaos]

I have no doubt that Merckx would have won multiple GTs in an undoped peloton.

Certainly true as this would have given Merckx an unfair advantage.

 

[Captain Chaos]

as far as Levi goes. He certainly isn't the most entertaining rider has no panche but you can't fault a guy for riding within his abilities which certainly is not on par with other GC contenders.

 

[slowoldman]

In the closing minutes of a basketball team, if one team deliberately fouls an opposing player to force the other team throw the ball in from the sides and possibly turn over the ball then that is one thing. If the same team decides to have a player deliberately injure another to force him out of the game thenn that is a completely different matter. Both are against the rules. Both are cheating. According to you and slowoldman, the two forms of cheating are equivalent; but you would be hard pressed to find others with the same view.

Not even the same argument. Again, by definition, what older era riders and EPO era riders did are the same....they cheated.
You keep offering up levels of cheating where we are referring to the base action.

Again I ask you, how do you feel about Landis? He was caught using testosterone, according to your logic he only cheated a bit, it shouldn't effect the outcome of the Tour especially against all those EPO freaks. Do you believe he is the champion of the 06 Tour?

Or did he in fact, cheat?

 

[Captain Chaos]

Again I ask you, how do you feel about Landis? He was caught using testosterone,...

To this day I still don't know what all the fuss was with Flandis drink some Jack on rubbin' his nut sack with some T before some jumpin' in the sack with his wife?

what was he going to say "Not tonight my hip hurts."

 

[jaylew]

My list also mentions Gadret who seems to be entirely MIA. Whilst I appreciate the fact that you trawled through all my posts to prove a point, I feel it's somewhat obsessive (and entirely misses the point of the original post but since the level of comprehension around here often beggars belief that's only to be expected )

Not really. The advanced search function is quite comprehensive - took about 10 secs total. And as you well know but are trying to deflect, it started with me responding to your earlier chest-thumping paragraph, which admittedly, I probably should have let go since it was between you and 53/11.

Of course it misses the point of the original post! We both know that! You said you probably didn't say it, I showed you that you did - simple as that.

So we can't make a comparison of Merckx to Armstrong because the eras have 'moved on' - sorry, not buying that for a minute - next you'll be telling me that Beloki was a greater rider than Ocana

Yes, that's' it. I think I'm supposed to add one of those condescending little smileys here. Is this the right one?

Leo, absolutely agreed - I direct anyone to the Ashenden interview. There is a great deal of credible proof - perhaps jay would like to talk to Betsy Andreu about what she heard in that hospital room?

You've got to be kidding me. A straw man?? I know exactly what she heard in that room.

 

[Anonymous]

Actually, there is plenty of proof, decisive proof. More proof than, for example, in Marco Pantani's case.

Proof would lead to a suspension and possible loss of titles.

Neither happened.

 

[Leopejo]

Proof would lead to a suspension and possible loss of titles.

Actually, no.