Lance's program was superior? The evidence

Page 10 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
Skandar Akbar said:
Yes I have admitted I have nothing on anybody else. Thus, it is possible all these high speeds, with no positives, were due to coincidence and blood transfusions.

Problem with that is I thought you needed a high powered doc to come up with that program, at least early on. Strange nobody got busted for roids, making agents, T, clen, etc during that time either.
"That time"? I assume you are on about just the Tour again?

Most riders jacked up heavily during their traning times and pre event and then kept within limits that could be diluted down if called for a test during events like the Tour. (Read Willy Voets book)
Which is why having notice of OOC testing was important.
 

Skandar Akbar

BANNED
Nov 20, 2010
177
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
So you're saying that everyone else was making do with blood transfusions and coincidence while Lance (the only one paying off the UCI) was the only one on a super program from a high powered doc? That certainly could account for his superiority then, I think you are on to something there.
No are you drunk? This is the second time you have attributed docs post to me. He said nobody got caught due to autologous blood transfusions not being detectable. I pointed out that it was strange nobody of any significance got busted for anything during that time.

So, I think doc is saying since the clairvoyant UCI lady didn't mention anybody else paying off the UCI, LA was the only one that did and the speeds were still high and nobody got caught due to autologous blood transfusions. It's pretty funny those idiots went back to the detectable stuff after LA retired lol. I'm trying not to think of pesky little facts such as that because it makes me look stupid pointing out holes in docs fact story. Plus you would read that 180 degrees opposite that it is written in plain english.

Look, I'm in learning mode here. Please read carefully because I have little spare brainpower to constantly be correcting you.
 

Barrus

BANNED
Apr 28, 2010
3,480
0
0
Be kind, civil, stop the personal attacks and stay on-topic. The next eprsonal attack, no matter from whom will result in consequences
 
Barrus said:
Be kind, civil, stop the personal attacks and stay on-topic. The next eprsonal attack, no matter from whom will result in consequences
I think his question was legit, just off by 180 degrees. He seems to have a real problem understanding my questions and I have a hard enough time trying to bring him up to speed even without you eliminating his posts just as I am trying to respond to them.
 
Mar 8, 2010
3,263
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
So you're saying that everyone else was making do with blood transfusions and coincidence while Lance (the only one paying off the UCI) was the only one on a super program from a high powered doc? That certainly could account for his superiority then, I think you are on to something there.
This is the second time you have attributed docs post to him. He said nobody got caught due to autologous blood transfusions not being detectable. He pointed out that it was strange nobody of any significance got busted for anything during that time.

So, he thinks doc is saying since the clairvoyant UCI lady didn't mention anybody else paying off the UCI, LA was the only one that did and the speeds were still high and nobody got caught due to autologous blood transfusions. It's pretty funny those idiots went back to the detectable stuff after LA retired lol. He is trying not to think of pesky little facts such as that because it makes him look stupid pointing out holes in docs fact story. Plus you would read that 180 degrees opposite that it is written in plain english.

Look, he is in learning mode here. Please read carefully because he has little spare brainpower to constantly be correcting you.
 

Skandar Akbar

BANNED
Nov 20, 2010
177
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
I think his question was legit, just off by 180 degrees. He seems to have a real problem understanding my questions and I have a hard enough time trying to bring him up to speed even without you eliminating his posts just as I am trying to respond to them.
It's no big deal. The eloquence in cobblestoned's post makes me wish I had written it myself. My bad for the attack.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
Cobblestoned said:
This is the second time you have attributed docs post to him. He said nobody got caught due to autologous blood transfusions not being detectable. He pointed out that it was strange nobody of any significance got busted for anything during that time.

So, he thinks doc is saying since the clairvoyant UCI lady didn't mention anybody else paying off the UCI, LA was the only one that did and the speeds were still high and nobody got caught due to autologous blood transfusions. It's pretty funny those idiots went back to the detectable stuff after LA retired lol. He is trying not to think of pesky little facts such as that because it makes him look stupid pointing out holes in docs fact story. Plus you would read that 180 degrees opposite that it is written in plain english.

Look, he is in learning mode here. Please read carefully because he has little spare brainpower to constantly be correcting you.
You appear to forget that I also posted quotes from Verbruggen and McQuaid - who confirmed LA gave donations - yet neither have mentioned anyone else as having done so.
 
Mar 8, 2010
3,263
0
0
Cobblestoned said:
This is the second time you have attributed docs post to him. He said nobody got caught due to autologous blood transfusions not being detectable. He pointed out that it was strange nobody of any significance got busted for anything during that time.

So, he thinks doc is saying since the clairvoyant UCI lady didn't mention anybody else paying off the UCI, LA was the only one that did and the speeds were still high and nobody got caught due to autologous blood transfusions. It's pretty funny those idiots went back to the detectable stuff after LA retired lol. He is trying not to think of pesky little facts such as that because it makes him look stupid pointing out holes in docs fact story. Plus you would read that 180 degrees opposite that it is written in plain english.

Look, he is in learning mode here. Please read carefully because he has little spare brainpower to constantly be correcting you.
Good point here.
They all wanted to be the next giant, whatever it takes. Cold war arms race.
And they ALL failed.
 
Cobblestoned said:
This is the second time you have attributed docs post to him. He said nobody got caught due to autologous blood transfusions not being detectable. He pointed out that it was strange nobody of any significance got busted for anything during that time.

So, he thinks doc is saying since the clairvoyant UCI lady didn't mention anybody else paying off the UCI, LA was the only one that did and the speeds were still high and nobody got caught due to autologous blood transfusions. It's pretty funny those idiots went back to the detectable stuff after LA retired lol. He is trying not to think of pesky little facts such as that because it makes him look stupid pointing out holes in docs fact story. Plus you would read that 180 degrees opposite that it is written in plain english.

Look, he is in learning mode here. Please read carefully because he has little spare brainpower to constantly be correcting you.
Well it seems to me that the Doc and you......I mean Skandar are saying the same thing then.
1. Everyone was using blood transfusions. check
2. No one that we know of other than Lance had any "arrangement" with the UCI. check
3. Lance due to this exclusive arrangement was able to use more advantageous methods of doping than everyone else. check

Maybe Lance never told anybody that he was protected by UCI and they thought they could use all the same drugs he was and not get caught?
 

Skandar Akbar

BANNED
Nov 20, 2010
177
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
Well it seems to me that the Doc and you......I mean Skandar are saying the same thing then.
1. Everyone was using blood transfusions. check
2. No one that we know of other than Lance had any "arrangement" with the UCI. check
3. Lance due to this exclusive arrangement was able to use more advantageous methods of doping than everyone else. check

Maybe Lance never told anybody that he was protected by UCI and they thought they could use all the same drugs he was and not get caught?
1. No I did not say that. Doc said that. I don't know if that is true and neither does he.
2. Agreed. We publicly know of nobody else giving donations. I stress the word publicly.
3. That is your conclusion. I never said that nor do I agree with that statement.
 
Mar 8, 2010
3,263
0
0
Skandar Akbar said:
It's no big deal. The eloquence in cobblestoned's post makes me wish I had written it myself. My bad for the attack.
Well, don't blame yourself. Ok, just a little bit.
You will figure out soon how things "work" here. Perhaps you already do.

This was the typical scenario you saw, which I won't point out any further here because its too obvious and I am tired of that.
 
Aug 11, 2009
729
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
...Verbruggen and McQuaid - who confirmed LA gave donations...
And what a confirmation it was from those transparent fellows! He definitely only made one payment. Definitely for this amount. No, wait. I hear he made more payments. What? It was for five times as much as I said before? As you can see, the UCI is open, honest, and thorough...

...I'm sure there was nothing more to the Lance payments.
 
Skandar Akbar said:
Yes I have admitted I have nothing on anybody else. Thus, it is possible all these high speeds, with no positives, were due to coincidence and blood transfusions.

Problem with that is I thought you needed a high powered doc to come up with that program, at least early on. Strange nobody got busted for roids, making agents, T, clen, etc during that time either.
Hugh Januss said:
Well it seems to me that the Doc and you......I mean Skandar are saying the same thing then.
1. Everyone was using blood transfusions. check
2. No one that we know of other than Lance had any "arrangement" with the UCI. check
3. Lance due to this exclusive arrangement was able to use more advantageous methods of doping than everyone else. check

Maybe Lance never told anybody that he was protected by UCI and they thought they could use all the same drugs he was and not get caught?
Skandar Akbar said:
1. No I did not say that. Doc said that.
2. Agreed. We publicly know of nobody else giving donations. I stress the word publicly.
3. That is your conclusion. I never said that nor do I agree with that statement.
Well it sure seems to me like you were in agreement with the doc on the transfusion thing and the special program for Lance thing, but I am a simple man and maybe the nuances of your position have eluded me. I am sorry if that is the case.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
1
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
He’s the guy that everyone else hates. If you had a dollar for every time you heard someone slander the idea of a penis within his oral vicinity you’d have enough money to pay your own way to the TDF, and maybe a couple of your buddies.
Major props on this post GW. :D
 

Skandar Akbar

BANNED
Nov 20, 2010
177
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
Well it sure seems to me like you were in agreement with the doc on the transfusion thing and the special program for Lance thing, but I am a simple man and maybe the nuances of your position have eluded me. I am sorry if that is the case.
Ah I see your point I was being sarcastic. I should've used the rolling eyes emoticon. For the record, I do not believe this is all one big coincidence and solely blood doping was used that resulted in no positives for those 7 years in that GT.

Here is your belated emoticon. Better late than never.
:rolleyes:
 

Barrus

BANNED
Apr 28, 2010
3,480
0
0
Could you use a bit more female friendly terms the next time? She is quite a well respected person
 

Skandar Akbar

BANNED
Nov 20, 2010
177
0
0
Barrus said:
Could you use a bit more female friendly terms the next time? She is quite a well respected person
Yes, my apolgies. I was ribbing doc because I knew it bothered him. Sorry.

'Well respected' is an opinion and is irrelevant in the matter at hand. She does not know every behind the scenes payoff for cover that may or may not take place. And the $ amount she quotes is unverifiable and in dispute.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
Skandar Akbar said:
Yes, my apolgies. I was ribbing doc because I knew it bothered him. Sorry.

'Well respected' is an opinion and is irrelevant in the matter at hand. She does not know every behind the scenes payoff for cover that may or may not take place. And the $ amount she quotes is unverifiable and in dispute.
It didn't bother me - I quite liked that you weren't afraid to show your sexism and bias - it's easier to try to degrade her than dismiss what she says.

Oh, but she knew about Lances - and she was a lot closer (which she qualified with "to the best of my understanding") then Lance or even McQuaid were.

Again since Verbruggen was so enthusiastic to say Lance 'donated' why not reveal others who had too?
 

Skandar Akbar

BANNED
Nov 20, 2010
177
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
It didn't bother me - I quite liked that you weren't afraid to show your sexism and bias - it's easier to try to degrade her than dismiss what she says.

Oh, but she knew about Lances - and she was a lot closer (which she qualified with "to the best of my understanding") then Lance or even McQuaid were.

Again since Verbruggen was so enthusiastic to say Lance 'donated' why not reveal others who had too?
There is no way I am sexist. My mother is a woman.

Yes, she knew about LA's donation. So what?

I haven't the foggiest idea why Verbruggen does some things and not others. I don't pick and choose his words to support my argument like you do. Tomorrow you will be saying he is a liar to support your position.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
Skandar Akbar said:
There is no way I am sexist. My mother is a woman.

Yes, she knew about LA's donation. So what?

I haven't the foggiest idea why Verbruggen does some things and not others. I don't pick and choose his words to support my argument like you do. Tomorrow you will be saying he is a liar to support your position.
Verbruggen lies alright - that is why I put in the supporting quotes from Schenk.
 
Aug 11, 2009
729
0
0
Verbruggen lies, no doubt.

I will at least give him credit, though, for seeming to have been a man with a relatively clear vision of how he wanted to (corruptly) manage things. In this way, I see him as having a lot in common with Samaranch. Manage/cover-up doping; commercialize sports; create favorable conditions for corporate sponsors.

McQuaid, on the other hand? Certainly lies on par with Verbruggen. On the other hand, talks about a thousand times more frequently and more prematurely. Plenty of talk about globalization; not too sure there's much true vision behind that guy's behavior, though.

Obviously, neither makes me particularly hopeful. A reluctant confession from either one, however, certainly won't start smoking where there's no fire, and those Armstrong payments are burning a hole in somebody's pocket.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
It is difficult to take your questions seriously when you suggest that a piece does not say what you requested when you take a key point out of it - this is what RR said:

Originally Posted by Race Radio
EPO, like all doping, effects each rider in different ways. There are multiple studies that confirm this, like this one
http://www.haematologica.org/cgi/reprint/86/2/128.pdf.

....which you acknowledge with:
"Except for one sentence mentioning that certain parameters of reticulocyte formation show large inter-individual variation."
RR was very obviously trying to argue that the article provided evidence that EPO provides different levels of performance enhancement for different individuals. There is nothing in that article that supports that.

As an aside, I find it interesting that some of you change tactics in the middle of an argument. Was it a better program, or was LA just a better responder? If the latter, no need to bring in Ferrari at all. OTOH, if he was a better responder, those same articles you claim show wide variation in responding to EPO (I can't access the latest link offered, so can't comment on it) would also indicate that LA would definitely not be the only one, and probably not the greatest responder.




The blue is a strawman, you want others to prove a point that you brought up.
EPO is not a magic pill that guarantees that you will climb better by X% or TT better by Y% - it is a PED that raises oxygen delivery, it is up to the individual what they concentrate on.
LA post cancer rode the Classics as 'training' to peak for his only goal of the season, the TdF.
I pointed that out in my post. But I also pointed out that he tried to win these races on occasion, and failed. Moreover, sincehe won TDS or Dauphine several times pre-Tour, the argument that he couldn't excel in a race that he entered primarily for training clearly does not hold.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
Getting back to the original post - how did Lance's donation/bribe to the UCI help him win one two three four five six seven Tours in a row?

1) Did it give Lance protection from Pound/WADA and Bordry/AFLD?

You have to remember, those guys were OBSESSED with catching Lance.
Eye twitching, hand shaking obsessed with catching Lance.
TARGET NUMERO UNO. No stinking bio passport required. Get Lance 24/7..
Heck, it turns out they were aware of HemAssist way back in Y2K.

2) or Did it take away protection from Lance's opponents?
Maybe even set them up for a fall? Remember the e-mail Lance sent to WADA and the ASO giving a heads-up on "bovine doping".
And Lance's donation/bribe supposedly went to testing equipment.

3) Maybe the donation/bribe "kept him in the game" by covering up a dope fail that would have effectively ruined his awesome streak?

I would guess #3 or maybe #2.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
masking_agent The Clinic 2

ASK THE COMMUNITY