Simeoni/Armstrong Tour de France 2004 - stage 18 - video link

[Jacques (7 ch)]

Re: Simeoni/Armstrong Tour de France 2004 - stage 18 - video

The old threads are the best ...

 

[This Charming Man]

Re: Lance

test scores Dave?

Armstrong was a high-school drop out, does not even have a GED.

Lance is incredibly intelligent.

 

[rick james]

Re:

...lance had a pfysiological afvantage enabling him to trounce the opposition without even trying

..this was well proven by various tests

He had what??

 

[StyrbjornSterki]

Re: Simeoni/Armstrong Tour de France 2004 - stage 18 - video

...lance had a pfysiological afvantage enabling him to trounce the opposition without even trying...

His pfysiological afvantage (sic) is he was a high responder to PEDs.

 

[laughingcavalier]

Re: Simeoni/Armstrong Tour de France 2004 - stage 18 - video

...lance had a pfysiological afvantage enabling him to trounce the opposition without even trying...

His pfysiological afvantage (sic) is he was a high responder to PEDs.

Are we talking about the same guy?
The one I followed was tested more than any other athlete and never tested positive.

 

[Aragon]

Re: Simeoni/Armstrong Tour de France 2004 - stage 18 - video

His pfysiological afvantage (sic) is he was a high responder to PEDs.

I don't know whether it has been ever established how well he would've performed had everyone been clean even when particularly Mike Ashenden and Greg LeMond seem to hold the position that he was naturally mediocre at best.

I don't find their reasoning that good, particularly Mike Ashenden's SCA testimony looks weird when he takes average of Armstrong's IN and OFFseason relative Vo2Max readings, finally estimating that his figure was around low or mid 70s. The only INseason figure was 81 and his absolute value tested at least three times above six litres, which is a very rare figure.

About LeMond, I tend to somewhat agree with J. Bruyneel on this one when criticizes how LeMond calculates Watts from Vo2max figures directly with almost 1-1 correlation touting how superior he was and going as far as to claim Lance might've used motor because there are some dozen or two watts unaccounted for:

Dear Greg Lemond, we all know by now how much your VO2max is, it's about the only scientific term you know in sport. And it's also probably the 1000th time you're saying how high your VO2max was in an interview.
And we know your VO2max because that's what you tell us it is. So it must be right, because Lemond says so.

As far as I know, no peer review study or physiological project has released his Vo2max data and to be honest, I don't know whether there is anything but his word to back up the claim that his hematocrit never exceeded 45 % as he has claimed.

 

[This Charming Man]

Re: Simeoni/Armstrong Tour de France 2004 - stage 18 - video

Why hate on Armstrong. His PED programme was the same as many others of his contemporaries, plus those before him and after him.

 

[Tonton]

Re: Lance

test scores Dave?

Armstrong was a high-school drop out, does not even have a GED.

Lance is incredibly intelligent.

Armstrong wasn't stupid: his foundation was a great PR move, and it would have been a great shield against suspicion had he played it BigMig, be the nice guy, not made enemies...but he couldn't help being a bully and a jerk, and in the end that wasn't smart. Froome learned that lesson: he's intelligent. LA wasn't.

 

[ppanther92]

Re: Simeoni/Armstrong Tour de France 2004 - stage 18 - video

Why hate on Armstrong. His PED programme was the same as many others of his contemporaries, plus those before him and after him.

Sure, difference was the protection and "too big to fail status". Positive test - no problem, its gone, just make a donation. TUE violation - meh, bring it backdated. Mayo going up the mountains too fast in the Dauphine - we will care about him.

Additionally he was a bully and jerk to so many people. I see why he draws hate on him. Anyway, justice was done at least a little bit of it. And one of the main reasons is that he made too many enemies.

 

[hrotha]

Re: Simeoni/Armstrong Tour de France 2004 - stage 18 - video

Why hate on Armstrong. His PED programme was the same as many others of his contemporaries, plus those before him and after him.

He asked, in the thread about Armstrong's most public act of bullying and intimidation.

 

[WildspokeJoe]

Re: Lance

test scores Dave?

Armstrong was a high-school drop out, does not even have a GED.

Lance is incredibly intelligent.

Armstrong wasn't stupid: his foundation was a great PR move, and it would have been a great shield against suspicion had he played it BigMig, be the nice guy, not made enemies...but he couldn't help being a bully and a jerk, and in the end that wasn't smart. Froome learned that lesson: he's intelligent. LA wasn't.

Lance is a smart dude. He surrounded himself with smart people. The only reason he got caught was because federal investigators from the US government were brought in and flipped the other riders with the threat of jail time. If this had stayed inside the sport he would have gotten away with it.

The clinic has 5,000 topics and 500k posts. Anyone that thinks that doping is not entrenched in the sport and has gone away is the fool.

 

[thehog]

Re: Lance

test scores Dave?

Armstrong was a high-school drop out, does not even have a GED.

Lance is incredibly intelligent.

Armstrong wasn't stupid: his foundation was a great PR move, and it would have been a great shield against suspicion had he played it BigMig, be the nice guy, not made enemies...but he couldn't help being a bully and a jerk, and in the end that wasn't smart. Froome learned that lesson: he's intelligent. LA wasn't.

Lance is a smart dude. He surrounded himself with smart people. The only reason he got caught was because federal investigators from the US government were brought in and flipped the other riders with the threat of jail time. If this had stayed inside the sport he would have gotten away with it.

The clinic has 5,000 topics and 500k posts. Anyone that thinks that doping is not entrenched in the sport and has gone away is the fool.

He looked stupid in the Astana kit, the comeback 2.0 whilst a smart move meshed in with Livestrong to give the appearance of charity, the greed of it all ultimately brought him down.

 

[MarkvW]

Re: Lance

test scores Dave?

Armstrong was a high-school drop out, does not even have a GED.

Lance is incredibly intelligent.

Armstrong wasn't stupid: his foundation was a great PR move, and it would have been a great shield against suspicion had he played it BigMig, be the nice guy, not made enemies...but he couldn't help being a bully and a jerk, and in the end that wasn't smart. Froome learned that lesson: he's intelligent. LA wasn't.

Lance is a smart dude. He surrounded himself with smart people. The only reason he got caught was because federal investigators from the US government were brought in and flipped the other riders with the threat of jail time. If this had stayed inside the sport he would have gotten away with it.

The clinic has 5,000 topics and 500k posts. Anyone that thinks that doping is not entrenched in the sport and has gone away is the fool.

Lance is an obvious dumbass. Good bike rider though. Great responder to EPO.

 

[geisterhome]

Re: Lance



Lance is an obvious dumbass. Good bike rider though. Great responder to EPO.

I'd also say that what "achieved" wasn't based on high intelligence, he just has the right personality. That huge sense of entitlement. Think of it, at the Tour de Suisse, he was "only" a two time TDF winner, there were still guys in the peloton more accomplished than him, yet he felt he felt entitled to call the UCI to cover up for his failed test. I believe some other riders just wouldn't pull off such move. Rules didn't apply to him, not cos he was the best and most successful rider but rather cos he decided they wouldn't. He thought he had to right to do whatever he feels is right and just did what he wanted. Like the thing with him never getting speeding tickets or ordering the custom officers to let him pass without being checked. Regular people would feel guilt or at least some respect towards the Police, he just lacked any sense of it. And that one time he actually got a ticket he was shocked and pissed, again a normal reaction IMO would be smth like, ok I can't complain since I got away so many other times while actually doing smth that isn't right. Also, riders and people involved probably knew that he would go lengths they never would if they stood up against him. Just an every intimidating presence overall, somebody that most couldn't stand but they knew that guy is crazier than me and would do things I would never dare to imagine doing.

 

[fmk_RoI]

I'd also say that what "achieved" wasn't based on high intelligence, he just has the right personality.

Let's ignore the dehumanising aspect of your comment - your need to belittle him - but intelligence is not a prerequisite of cycling champions. Some, in fact, would consider it an impediement.

That huge sense of entitlement. Think of it, at the Tour de Suisse, he was "only" a two time TDF winner, there were still guys in the peloton more accomplished than him, yet he felt he felt entitled to call the UCI to cover up for his failed test. I believe some other riders just wouldn't pull off such move.

And there is absolutely zero evidence that Armstrong ever pulled off such a move. He may have later told others that the UCI's failure to spot his cancer in drug tests gave him a hold over Aigle, and he may have told others that he got a positive wiped, but all the evidence says is that one of his tests was in the grey area of the scale and so he didn't trip the thresholds. All the eveidence suggests is that what he said was bragging, not backed up by evidence. But people were willing to believe it was true.

Rules didn't apply to him, not cos he was the best and most successful rider but rather cos he decided they wouldn't. He thought he had to right to do whatever he feels is right and just did what he wanted. Like the thing with him never getting speeding tickets or ordering the custom officers to let him pass without being checked.

And the evidence for this is what? It's not him getting Emma O'Reilly to take stuff through customs for him.

You don't like the guy, we get it. He's not very likable. But FFS, cut the demonising.

 

[hrotha]

And there is absolutely zero evidence that Armstrong ever pulled off such a move. He may have later told others that the UCI's failure to spot his cancer in drug tests gave him a hold over Aigle, and he may have told others that he got a positive wiped, but all the evidence says is that one of his tests was in the grey area of the scale and so he didn't trip the thresholds. All the eveidence suggests is that what he said was bragging, not backed up by evidence. But people were willing to believe it was true.

I like to think the UCI ripped him off for a free toy.

 

[fmk_RoI]

I like to think the UCI ripped him off for a free toy.

And that is the other part of it. He's going around telling chumps like Floyd and Ty and JV that he had power over Verbruggen cause of the failure to spot his hCG score - and they believe him! - and yet he has to go and cut the UCI a couple of cheques, even has to be chased to issue one of them.

Add in that the UCI was regularly briefing riders caught in the grey zone, and add in that the skinny USPS was supposedly given on the EPO test was given to all the other teams, and ... well it looks like braggadocio, it sounds like braggadocio, why don't we just call it braggadocio?

 

[Aragon]

Here is more "bragging" by the Texan from JV's affidavit:

93. While Lance was in town [...] we went on a training ride together, and I asked Lance whether he thought the new EPO test works? He said that his sources told him that it works like a spectrum, and as long as you are in the grey area you do not need to worry about testing positive.
94. Lance then asked me, "Do you know who invented the EPO test?" I did not so Lance told me, "Conconi.", Lance said, "I have a couple of friends of Conconi who have told me how the test works".

Even USADA accepted this account in its "Reasoned Decision" this word-to-word at face value (p. 51). The problem is that whereas Conconi had done some research for the rHuEPO test (many scientist had, among then e.g. Björn Ekblom, Jim Stray-Gundersen...), Conconi had no input into the approach developed by the Châtenay-Malabry - scientists actually used by the testers.

The "Saugy gave Lance and Johan the keys to beating the EPO test?'"-claim made by Travis Tygart is also a myth, and unsympathetic biographer Juliet Macur acknowledges in her Armstrong-bio that the literature about the test was pretty much publicly available when they lectured the Texan about the test after his Tour de Suisse "suspicious" test. Because Tyler Hamilton who left USPS in 2001 knew about in-the-vein microdosing, the method to beat the test was adapted likely pretty much after the introduction of the rHuEPO test and before Lance met the UCI lab people.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Because Tyler Hamilton who left USPS in 2001 knew about in-the-vein microdosing, the method to beat the test was adapted likely pretty much after the introduction of the rHuEPO test and before Lance met the UCI lab people.

JV talks about in-the-vein microdosing in his book, for the 2001 Dauphiné where he won the ITT (he had a panic attack that he'd missed the vein and would pop a positive). This was when he was in his second season at Crédit Agricole, so the knowledge clearly spread.

 

[geisterhome]

Let's ignore the dehumanising aspect of your comment - your need to belittle him - but intelligence is not a prerequisite of cycling champions. Some, in fact, would consider it an impediement.

And there is absolutely zero evidence that Armstrong ever pulled off such a move. He may have later told others that the UCI's failure to spot his cancer in drug tests gave him a hold over Aigle, and he may have told others that he got a positive wiped, but all the evidence says is that one of his tests was in the grey area of the scale and so he didn't trip the thresholds. All the eveidence suggests is that what he said was bragging, not backed up by evidence. But people were willing to believe it was true.

And the evidence for this is what? It's not him getting Emma O'Reilly to take stuff through customs for him.

You don't like the guy, we get it. He's not very likable. But FFS, cut the demonising.

"Dehumanising"? Really, how so? He was showing pretty regular human behavior, there are countless Lance Armstrongs out there, not the most likable human beings but it is how it is and it doesn't bother me one bit nor could I do smth about it.
I used to hate the guy way back when he was still riding as a pro, now I'm more intrigued and fascinated by his personality. Also, he has definitely paid the price for his wrongdoings.
I actually aimed at being more descriptive than anything else, if it didn't come across like that then my bad.

He might be very intelligent, I don't know (sure he is is no dumbass). However, what I meant, to become as powerful as he was and doing what he did he didn't need his intelligence first and foremost. He had other qualities, and for sure there was some personality disorder at play there, that made him successful in his own way.

Maybe he was bragging yes, but there is at least as much evidence that he didn't. First of all, there was a positive test (Dr. Saugy), then Armstrong offered 100.000 bucks to the UCI and he both told (bragged?)about it to Hamilton and Landis on different occasions/years. The USADA reports agrees btw.


Landis told in an interview (youtube) about at least two occasions of him passing customs like that.
Emma stopped working for Lance and USP in 1999, so the last time she was transporting anything suspicions for him was most likely before he won any Tour titles so of course as someone pretty much unknown to the regular public even LA had to be more careful.

 

[fmk_RoI]

First of all, there was a positive test (Dr. Saugy)

You're just going to keep saying there was a positive test, aren't you, no matter how many times you're told there wasn't? Here's Saugy, from the link I already provided above, quoted from the Neue Züricher Zeitung:

They [the four suspect samples] were taken at four different stages [during the Tour de Suisse in June 2001], so I don't know whether they were from four different riders or all of the same athlete. But the tests were not covered up, and it is also not correct that they could have been interpreted as positive. They were suspect, and you wouldn't stand a chance at all with that sole argument in front of a court.

The Paris laboratory of Chatenay-Malabry fixed the criteria for a positive test result. An athlete was positive only if eighty percent of the signs typical for the use of synthetic EPO were found. [A suspect sample was one that] showed between seventy and eighty percent of the typical EPO parameters. That meant that the probability of doping was high. But because such a result can also be produced naturally, it was all about excluding false positives.

 

[geisterhome]

You're just going to keep saying there was a positive test, aren't you, no matter how many times you're told there wasn't? Here's Saugy, from the link I already provided above, quoted from the Neue Züricher Zeitung:

Alright, so maybe there was no positive test, but anyway what is the point you are trying to make? That he wasn't as powerful in cycling or he didn't really have any influence in the UCI? Yea well, maybe he didn't, he still was very powerful and feared in the Peleton no doubt about that.

Btw. didn't you tell me that I "belittle" him? Maybe you are actually belittling him, I mean who isn't believing that he could even silence the UCI? FFS just stop!!(Just kidding ..)

 

[86TDFWinner]

A simple "Armstrong Simeoni" search on YouTube used to yield numerous results. Now they're all gone. Hmm.

Wonderboy probably used some of his millions to get them removed from all media outlets.

 

[86TDFWinner]

You're just going to keep saying there was a positive test, aren't you, no matter how many times you're told there wasn't? Here's Saugy, from the link I already provided above, quoted from the Neue Züricher Zeitung:

Umm, Tyler Hamilton/Flandis and Betsy/Frankie said he's(Wonderboy) had numerous positives. But let's not take the words of people who were around him daily as any sort of credible evidence, lol.

 

[86TDFWinner]

Re: Simeoni/Armstrong Tour de France 2004 - stage 18 - video


Are we talking about the same guy?
The one I followed was tested more than any other athlete and never tested positive.

LMAO! Something like "I've beem tested 967 times and never 1 positive, they're all jealous and lying".