USADA - Armstrong

[joe_papp]

Well 73% is for a metastasized testis cancer (which was his case since it had gone to the brain, i.e. "brain tumors") but when it's still local or to the nearby nodes, recovery is 99%. Most other metastasized cancers are very deadly (colon : 12% 5-year survival). I guess for testis cancer the trick is treating it in time.

Again, cancer is obviously a terrible thing but until I looked it up in detail a few years ago I was under the impression that Dopestrong's recovery was indeed miraculous and added weight to his "how could I be doping after coming back from the dead", which with a 73% survival rate it isn't exactly.

Max Testa also allegedly caught some flack for not spotting the enlarged testicle of his rider and ordering tests. Or so I was told by Fraysse.

 

[Eyeballs Out]

Well 73% is for a metastasized testis cancer (which was his case since it had gone to the brain, i.e. "brain tumors") but when it's still local or to the nearby nodes, recovery is 99%. Most other metastasized cancers are very deadly (colon : 12% 5-year survival). I guess for testis cancer the trick is treating it in time.

Again, cancer is obviously a terrible thing but until I looked it up in detail a few years ago I was under the impression that Dopestrong's recovery was indeed miraculous and added weight to his "how could I be doping after coming back from the dead", which with a 73% survival rate it isn't exactly.

The survival rate of TC depends very much on the type of TC. Most TCs are entirely treatable while there are some rarer aggressive tumor types which are very bad news indeed. Quoting survival rates without explaining (or knowing ?) the exact tumor type is meaningless

 

[L'Etranger]

Max Testa also allegedly caught some flack for not spotting the enlarged testicle of his rider and ordering tests. Or so I was told by Fraysse.

Someone with a name like Max Testa should really be able to spot an enlarged testicle.

 

[Race Radio]

RR is unlikely to become more explicit, though he's already indicated that it had to do with Lance's developing cancer.

Basically, it's Verbruggen's fault that Lance had to have one ball removed.

A developing tumor can apparently be spotted by certain doping tests.
Lance's cancer was diagnosed in 1996, but the developing tumor should thus have been spotted by doping tests already prior to 1996.
However, since the UCI (/Verbruggen) were in the habit of covering up doping tests -- or making samples disappear, or whatever (this aspect remains somewhat unclear) -- Lance never found out he had a malicious tumor until 1996. Presumably, had he found out earlier, any operation to remove the tumor would have been much less dramatic/far-reaching.

There is more then one reason. It will all be public soon enough.

 

[taiwan]

Someone with a name like Max Testa should really be able to spot an enlarged testicle.

...you couldn't make it up..

 

[frenchfry]

One of Wonderboy's key challenges is he talked to much. Bragging about "Owning" Verbruggen to multiple people, teammates, staff, Mechanics, is something that sticks with people. They don't forget it.
Much of this bragging was done far prior to his ToS positive. There was a reason he was unconcerned when he tested positive, he owned Verbruggen.

I am thinking this was probably a time-share kind of ownership.

 

[mercianman]

I want facts4lance back online now!

Looks like your wish may be coming true...

https://twitter.com/flammecast/status/216111826398756864

 

[poupou]

Well 73% is for a metastasized testis cancer (which was his case since it had gone to the brain, i.e. "brain tumors") but when it's still local or to the nearby nodes, recovery is 99%. Most other metastasized cancers are very deadly (colon : 12% 5-year survival). I guess for testis cancer the trick is treating it in time.

Again, cancer is obviously a terrible thing but until I looked it up in detail a few years ago I was under the impression that Dopestrong's recovery was indeed miraculous and added weight to his "how could I be doping after coming back from the dead", which with a 73% survival rate it isn't exactly.

On discovery channel documentary about Lance's cancer, his doctors tell us that he has a 40-50% survival rate.
But as we could guess, to survive a cancer or many diseases is more likely linked to treatments, medicines and doctors than will or aptitudes of patients.

 

[BotanyBay]

One of Wonderboy's key challenges is he talked to much. Bragging about "Owning" Verbruggen to multiple people, teammates, staff, Mechanics, is something that sticks with people. They don't forget it.
Much of this bragging was done far prior to his ToS positive. There was a reason he was unconcerned when he tested positive, he owned Verbruggen.

Lance is a perfect storm of badness. Think about it. His knickname was "mr millimeter". He never left very much to chance. So knowing his penchant for perfection, why not be thorough? Best dope, best doc for doping, best team director to tolerate doping, buy the organization that punishes dopers, intimidate and punish anyone who stands in the way, etc.

Part of the reason that Lance fanboys can't seem to believe he's a criminal is that to believe it, you'd have to believe that he's just that much more thorough than the average crook. He has star-abilities on the bike without the dope, so it's very easy to try and make everyone think they're just crazy for not believing.

What will also come to light in all of this is that besides being damn crooked, people will see just how damn far he was willing to go to keep the machine running.

 

[Benotti69]

Lance is a perfect storm of badness. Think about it. His knickname was "mr millimeter". He never left very much to chance. So knowing his penchant for perfection, why not be thorough? Best dope, best doc for doping, best team director to tolerate doping, buy the organization that punishes dopers, intimidate and punish anyone who stands in the way, etc.

Part of the reason that Lance fanboys can't seem to believe he's a criminal is that to believe it, you'd have to believe that he's just that much more thorough than the average crook. He has star-abilities on the bike without the dope, so it's very easy to try and make everyone think they're just crazy for not believing.

What will also come to light in all of this is that besides being damn crooked, people will see just how damn far he was willing to go to keep the machine running.

...He has star-abilities on the bike without the dope..

He was doping as a teenage Tri-athlete and doping as an amateur with Carmichael on the USA team so when did we see his 'star-abilities' on the bike without dope?

 

[MacRoadie]

Decent article:

http://http://m.therepublic.com/view/story/d14b51d12b8142cabc20149c31cba2de/CYC--Armstrong-Doping

 

[Cloxxki]

He was doping as a teenage Tri-athlete and doping as an amateur with Carmichael on the USA team so when did we see his 'star-abilities' on the bike without dope?

Pretty sure we got a vague indication in the latter stages of his last (to date) TdF.

 

[Benotti69]

Pretty sure we got a vague indication in the latter stages of his last (to date) TdF.

His last TdF was clean? I doubt that. I doubt he was vaguely clean. He might have had to drop a level but i bet his programme was 90% of previous TdF's. He was badly prepared and old.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Well we really are almost in agreement then. The difference seems to be that I don't deal in absolutes like you. You seem absolutely certain he could never have won in clean cycling fairyland. I deal in probabilities so I'm leaving it open to the realms of possibility.

Anyway, what just doesn't make sense to me is why a DS would even bother approaching a cyclist who apparently had no potential to win the TdF and was recovering from cancer, and then build an entire team around him with the goal of winning the TdF. It's a pretty expensive gamble that he is going to "respond" to the doping regime better than any other cyclist through the 90s isn't it? Because that is the implication here, he just isn't good enough to win the TdF, so we really need to hope to god this doping thing works really well.

Why wouldn't you just approach the cyclists that you thought had the best potential? I know if I were a DS that is exactly what I would do.

At the end of the day, some very powerful and well connected people in pro-cycling disagreed with your assertion that he had little GT potential and they chose LA to build that team with the goal of winning the TdF and then create a systematic doping regime to support that goal. Why would you choose a 2nd rate rider though? Just doesn't really make much sense to me. I guess they just got lucky and won 7 consecutive TdFs.

Fine, you say you deal in probabilities. But then state exactly what you would do as a DS. (& again base it entirely on GTs)

Whats alarming is that as a PhD I would expect that you base your opinions on the available facts and data.
You do realize that Armstrong was dropped by Cofidis and when he tried to make a return the only team willing to hire him was USPS at a fraction of what he was getting?
USPS had a GC guy in Hampsten - so I have no idea where you get the "base an entire team around him".

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I've been registered on this website for 3yrs more than you and I've never sprouted Armstrong crap. Maybe if you weren't such a n00b yourself would know my posting history better as the longer term residents here clearly do.

I'm lamenting at the whole miserable drug taking mess that cycling became especially in the 80s, 90s and has continued until this day. Despite my dislike of Armstrong and his systematic doping practices, I haven't lost sight of the fact that doping was almost ubiqitous in the pro-peloton in the 1990s. Busting LA is the best thing that can possibly happen to pro-cycling and I hope it becomes the catalyst for breaking the omerta in the future.

Thank you all for an entertaining day of discussion, but I must confess I have more pressing work to do. Happy clinic raving

I was one of the first 10 people to register on this site, it was just under another name. See my signature for the reference. So, if you weren't such a n00b yourself, you would know my posting history better as the longer term residents here clearly do.

 

[Microchip]

Decent article:

http://http://m.therepublic.com/view/story/d14b51d12b8142cabc20149c31cba2de/CYC--Armstrong-Doping

Three???!???? ONLY three in the panel??

 

[MarkvW]

I was one of the first 10 people to register on this site, it was just under another name. See my signature for the reference. So, if you weren't such a n00b yourself, you would know my posting history better as the longer term residents here clearly do.

It's not his fault he doesn't know your posting history all that well. It is kind of hard to tell your posting history because you deleted many of your embarrassing earlier posts when you deleted your earlier account.

 

[BotanyBay]

He was doping as a teenage Tri-athlete and doping as an amateur with Carmichael on the USA team so when did we see his 'star-abilities' on the bike without dope?

I was around at the time you say he was a doped-up jr. Wendell and Carmichael were probably far from "systematic", and you wouldn't have even been on their radar if you were not already winning scads of races all on your own.

EPO is for closers only.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I'm going to counter the argument you have been making here (that lance is a superior athlete) with someone who thinks you are a bit full of it.

You just wrote:

Well we really are almost in agreement then. The difference seems to be that I don't deal in absolutes like you. You seem absolutely certain he could never have won in clean cycling fairyland. I deal in probabilities so I'm leaving it open to the realms of possibility.

Anyway, what just doesn't make sense to me is why a DS would even bother approaching a cyclist who apparently had no potential to win the TdF and was recovering from cancer, and then build an entire team around him with the goal of winning the TdF. It's a pretty expensive gamble that he is going to "respond" to the doping regime better than any other cyclist through the 90s isn't it? Because that is the implication here, he just isn't good enough to win the TdF, so we really need to hope to god this doping thing works really well.

Why wouldn't you just approach the cyclists that you thought had the best potential? I know if I were a DS that is exactly what I would do.

At the end of the day, some very powerful and well connected people in pro-cycling disagreed with your assertion that he had little GT potential and they chose LA to build that team with the goal of winning the TdF and then create a systematic doping regime to support that goal. Why would you choose a 2nd rate rider though? Just doesn't really make much sense to me. I guess they just got lucky and won 7 consecutive TdFs.

A couple of years ago you wrote:

Well if all else remained equal and Lance farted a jet of high powered gas out his ar$e then it would be advantageous aswell.

What is the point in saying that something would be advantageous if it simply doesn't occur?

You are missing the point and it goes back to making completely unscientific statements bordering on outright lies in order to perpetuate the myth that LA was physiologically superior to his competitors and this is the reason why he was so dominant as opposed to having been a doper. Ed Coyle was called in as an expert witness in the SCA court case and testified as much. It is a big deal IMO because it gets to the heart of the matter (sorry about the pun), which is basically about honesty in the end.

edit: As far as I can see, the people who love cycling the most on this forum are all the people that want doping gone from the pro peloton. Wtf is wrong with that? What is there to hate about honesty, sportsmanship and ethical behaviour? The real "haters" out there are the people that are Lance fanboys and doping apologists who would rather turn a blind eye to the dishonest reality of professional sport (not just cycling), rather than see the truth come out and have a clean level playing field.

 

[MarkvW]

your illusory superiority is exhausting.

the ignored test results would only have to trigger the inappropriate relationship b/t HV and LA. it's quite likely that it grew more and more inappropriate over time because interests were aligned or for various other reasons like the economics of the sport.

try entertaining an idea you didn't think of first.

i know, i know... your response is a 3rd "tin foil hat stuff" which is the new "cool story bro" i guess

I can buy the developing inappropriate relationship. I'm actually pretty comfortable with that idea. The tinfoil hat idea is the idea that Verbruggen or the UCI had any legal responsibility for Lance's cancer.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

It's not his fault he doesn't know your posting history all that well. It is kind of hard to tell your posting history because you deleted many of your embarrassing earlier posts when you deleted your earlier account.

Um, no I didn't. I didn't delete anything. Talk to the mods about that. But the posts where you pretended to understand complex legal arguments, and I showed everyone here just how uninformed and inept you are at making such arguments are still there for all to see.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I can buy the developing inappropriate relationship. I'm actually pretty comfortable with that idea. The tinfoil hat idea is the idea that Verbruggen or the UCI had any legal responsibility for Lance's cancer.

I think most people recognize that the test results weren't ignored. The test results were not abnormal because Lance was masking. Why don't you guys get a room and beat on each other there because this discussion happened many years ago and was pretty well put to bed then.

 

[frenchfry]

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

 

[BotanyBay]

Chewbacca, when did I say "superior"? But even a mere stage finisher in the TDF is far beyond the level of fitness of your average Cat 1.

I think EPO would be wasted on me, but if Lance were to lose fifteen pounds in 98, EPO would certainly not be wasted on HIM.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Chewbacca, when did I say "superior"? But even a mere stage finisher in the TDF is far beyond the level of fitness of your average Cat 1.

I think EPO would be wasted on me, but if Lance were to lose fifteen pounds in 98, EPO would certainly not be wasted on HIM.

I think someone just forgot to log in under their other name? That or you missed the fact that I was posting one argument made by Krebs, with another post he made a couple of years ago. I wasn't addressing your post at all.