USADA - Armstrong

[ChewbaccaD]

Where did he say that? I must have missed that quote. Do you have a reference post?

I think it is a little more complicated than that. I've been a subject in two EPO studies and I was also a grad student working in the lab, so I conducted many of the VO2max tests done in those studies. Yes there is wide variation in the response to EPO and it is probable that Lance was a "responder". However, you still need to train hard and have the natural genetics to be at the top of the crop in the first place. Also, it is likely that someone who "responds" easily to EPO therapy will also respond to high intensity training and especially altitude training. There was a time when Lance was probably not a doper (in the 80s when he was a junior triathlete) and he was pretty much top of the crop. So, I believe it is likely that had there been no doping in cycling ever, Lance probably could have or would have been a cycling champion. 7 TdF wins? Who knows.

However, by the time Lance entered pro-cycling he already had an almighty ego and was an even bigger arrogant *** than what he is today (I know this because I lived in Dallas for a time and met people in the cycling community that knew him as a junior), so I believe that when he entered pro-cycling in 1992 he had dreams already to become the best, and so did many of the powerbrokers in USA cycling. What he suddenly was faced with though, were a whole lot of seasoned pros who were already doping, and he realized that even though he was good, he wasn't good enough to beat these guys. For someone with so much arrogance and ego, it was an easy choice to make to become a doper. And thus it begins with his high test:epi-test ratios found in 1993, but amazingly, unconfirmed. He then rises from the ashes and annihilates the competition who are literally at the zenith of the doping era, tests positive to EPO in 1999 in his first tour back and gets off on a technicality.

This is the tragedy of the whole story IMO. I really think he would have and could have been a true "American hero" and a true hero to all of cycling. But he doped, just like the rest of his rivals, but they got busted and he didn't..... until now??

And he suggests the same in several posts.

 

[peterst6906]

And he suggests the same in several posts.

OK. I didn't miss it.

Not exactly the same thing, but interpretation is in the hands of the reader, so I'm sure it suits your argument with him to extend his quote a bit further.

 

[Fidolix]

OK. I didn't miss it.

Not exactly the same thing, but interpretation is in the hands of the reader, so I'm sure it suits your argument with him to extend his quote a bit further.

lool its actually exactly what he said!!! troll

 

[peterst6906]

lool its actually exactly what he said!!! troll

Why am I a troll exactly?

7 TdF wins? Who knows. vs likely to have still won 7 doesn't seem to be the same thing. One's an extension of the other, but it's not my argument. It's just gone on over several pages, so I was interested to see exactly where.

 

[caryopsis]

Again - can we PLEASE take the infinite discussion of what Krebs did or didn't mean RE: young Armstrong, and everything related to it, to another thread and get back on topic?

Susan agreed with me ~20 pages ago, so I know I'm not alone here.

 

[DirtyWorks]

No, that isn't what he said at all. He said that without anyone doping, it is likely that Armstrong would still have won 7 (and/or showed great GT ability) because of his physiological superiority (as evidenced by his dominance as a junior.)

Not specific to you Chewie, but how anyone can get to this conclusion based on facts remains one of the great human mysteries.

There is simply no evidence to support Wonderboy being on a podium in a grand tour. There is sufficient evidence from recent multi-sport competitions to suggest he would have been Nationally competitive in his prime.

I'll even go so far as to give the guy the possibility of more than one podium in a one-day ProTour races. We all know that in bike racing, the strongest guy doesn't always win.

But, a grand tour contender of which there are many that never podium? No way. What evidence exists to refute this position?

Chewbacca! What a wookie!! - Supernova

 

[Anonymous]

Not specific to you Chewie, but how anyone can get to this conclusion based on facts remains one of the great human mysteries.

There is simply no evidence to support Wonderboy being on a podium in a grand tour. There is sufficient evidence from recent multi-sport competitions to suggest he would have been Nationally competitive in his prime.

I'll even go so far as to give the guy the possibility of more than one podium in a one-day ProTour races. We all know that in bike racing, the strongest guy doesn't always win.

But, a grand tour contender? No way. What evidence exists to refute this position?

Chewbacca! What a wookie!! - Supernova

This. Probably a much more prolific (American) classics rider than George... Although George's career was sidetracked with LA's TdF success.

Not sure he was big enough for the stones, but the hilly classics? Yeah, he would have been good there for many years I suspect.

 

[ElChingon]

So did he file or not?

 

[thehog]

So did he file or not?

12am cut off for USADA.

 

[gobuck]

There was a paper written on Armstrong by someone named Cohen. It showed his physiological characteristics from age 21 to age 28. I have the word document but I cannot copy and paste it to this site???

Nov 92 Jan 93 Sept 93 Aug 97 Nov 99

body weight 78.9 76.5 75.1 79.5 79.7

max 02 uptake 70.5 76.1 81.2 66.6 71.5

lac threshhold 85 78 76 76

gross efficiency 21.1 21.61 22.66 23.05

power at o2 374 382 399 404

There is more data but this is the main information. I don't think these numbers are world class. Also show that he never lost a bunch of weight after cancer.

 

[ElChingon]

12am cut off for USADA.

I'll check back then.

 

[pelodee]

@gobuck Not Coyle?

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

stop it now with the non-USADA stuff. You were warned earlier. As interesting as it may be, it does not belong here and all further postings on other subjects will be deleted.

It's not that hard to open a new thread, folks......

Susan

 

[JA.Tri]

An interesting and unbiased summary of the situation. Not a lot of detail but worth a look.

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/cycling/story/2012/06/22/sp-usada-cycling-lance-armstrong-doping.html

Very even handed. Be great if all could read and absorb. Thank you.

Edit: Was not so much referring to CN posters as to general LA fans that suffer an info black hole.

 

[thehog]

There was a paper written on Armstrong by someone named Cohen. It showed his physiological characteristics from age 21 to age 28. I have the word document but I cannot copy and paste it to this site???

Nov 92 Jan 93 Sept 93 Aug 97 Nov 99

body weight 78.9 76.5 75.1 79.5 79.7

max 02 uptake 70.5 76.1 81.2 66.6 71.5

lac threshhold 85 78 76 76

gross efficiency 21.1 21.61 22.66 23.05

power at o2 374 382 399 404

There is more data but this is the main information. I don't think these numbers are world class. Also show that he never lost a bunch of weight after cancer.

Read more here: http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden

Halfway down.

 

[gobuck]

have a difficult time.
Similarly, this is a table from Cohen's paper on Armstrong:


This is all that shows when I copy and paste

 

[mewmewmew13]

yes, Frenchfry ,thanks for that interesting article.

 

[DirtyWorks]

12am cut off for USADA.

What's the official time zone for the deadline? GMT -5? GMT -6 GMT -7? GMT -8?

 

[BotanyBay]

Still nothing filed in Federal court. Looks like tomorrow's meeting will go on uncontested.

Wonderboy, all talk no action.

He has no "deprivation of due process" damages to file in federal court (yet) until he's actually run the course of USADA's procedures. So I doubt he'll file anything in federal court today. The question is: Will he answer the USADA charges today?

My guess: No. It's a "Screw YOU guys, I'm going home!" situation.

 

[BotanyBay]

I guess it depends on what you think a winning team is.

Americans also like the easy path. Lance's myth is easy to swallow (and it tastes good!).

 

[mewmewmew13]

So..
according to Travis T himself...
in the hearing stage:

" Our process at the hearing stage does provide constitutional due process even though we are a private body.

Due process in our hearing includes:
- Notice of the allegations in writing
-Notice of the charges and possible consequence in writing
- Notice of the witnesses, their identity and the ability to confront them
-public hearing
- ability to cross exam witnesses who are under oath
- ability to present your own evidence including witnesses
- transcription of the live hearing
- independent judges (not USADA) that makes the decision on the case after the hearing
- a written decision that can be appealed"

So why are wonderboy and his legal team whining about divulging witness names?

I'm starting to get a little confused...

 

[Cancellator]

This is slightly off-topic, but there are enough Lance threads already.

I read on wiki that he had to have brain surgery to remove some tumors, and that extensive necrosis was found. Could this have an impact on your personality, way of thinking etc., because it is basically brain damage? Just asking.

 

[peacefultribe]

Americans also like the easy path. Lance's myth is easy to swallow (and it tastes good!).

True. The US is in a bad place right now on many levels. I don't want to get political, but the moral and ethical middle ground doesn't exist for people with money and power. If you stand up for what is fair, you will be destroyed. It happens all the time. To somebody like Armstrong, teamwork means doing things his way. If it's not done his way, then you're not a team player. The 2009 Tour was a perfect example. There are corrupt people in power all over the US, especially in sports, who manage to convince people that if you don't go along with them, then you're negative, or a hater. I just don't understand how people don't see the reality.

 

[21switchbacks]

So..
...

So why are wonderboy and his legal team whining about divulging witness names?

I'm starting to get a little confused...

Because they want to be able to smear the witnesses without actually proceeding to the hearing phase. Or, smear them publicly while the hearing stays closed (and not have to actually address the testimony).

 

[mewmewmew13]

Because they want to be able to smear the witnesses without actually proceeding to the hearing phase. Or, smear them publicly while the hearing stays closed (and not have to actually address the testimony).

Well, yes I do understand his motives...I guess I was just being rhetorical.

I just wish everyone could see what he does and how his whining attempts at pretending he is being 'unjustly' treated is a constant in his repertoire.

The 'victim' defense gets tiresome but it seems to be what he always falls back on.