Will Chris Boardman be on the French list for taking EPO.

[86TDFWinner]

I never quoted you as saying clown. If I had I would have put it in Something you seem unable to use.

Lol, you cant even lie correctly. Your Quote:

So your argument is that Lemond is a better rider than Boardman, la, la, la. Yeah Boardman's record is that of a real clown.

There you go assuming again. You clearly took what I said as him being a "clown". May I suggest getting thicker lenses in your glasses Ace.

Lemond struggled in 91 and in various interviews it is obvious he was starting to struggle against riders on EPO. He was also getting a bit older so that might have contributed to it but to think he would have beaten Indurain, Riis, etc while clean is probably wishful thinking. For someone who goes on about him you seem to know very little.

Lol again. First you say he cant beat riders or win in Boardmans era, now you claim he can, which is it?

91 he did struggle, but he won again in 92, then just got flat out murdered by epo riders.


oh, and heres the link to that article you asked for, addresses ALL of what i was talking about, you seemed to have trouble understanding. Pay close attention to the part where the article notes it was CLEARLY a banned substance, yet he was getting testosterone treatments every 2 months for 2 years, while still riding as a pro, mmkay, happy reading:


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/d...-BOARDMAN-I-cycling-32-I-bones-old-woman.html

 

[86TDFWinner]

And, again I ask, how many GTs would Lemond have won racing in the same TDF period as Boardman?

and AGAIN, I asked how youd know this, as earlier you said he wouldnt. Im not sure, cant answer really. Different time periods, i also pointed out that: Merckx?Hinault wouldnt have won 1 much less 5 each as well.


Im just assuming here of course, no different than what youve done.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

I think for Pedro's sake, its better his man crushes name DOESNT show up on any doper lists.

Or what? You are going to tell me how many Tours Greg won. Or what his VO2 max is. Scary stuff.

Even still, I'm going to enjoy the subterfuge from our dear friend DBLP, when I drop the hammer on his boy Boardman, maybe he won't be so " gay for Boardman" then.

I don't even know what this means.


On a side note.
I am lucky enough to work with some pretty powerful computers in my job that analyse financial models. I used the Chris Froome model and calibrated it to Alpe d'Huez. I plugged in your data 86TDFWinner and...

You scored 38 minutes i.e. You are the 'Full ***'.

Congratulations.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Who will win this pi$sing contest?

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Lol, you cant even lie correctly. Your Quote:




There you go assuming again. You clearly took what I said as him being a "clown". May I suggest getting thicker lenses in your glasses Corky.




Lol again. First you say he cant beat riders or win in Boardmans era, now you claim he can, which is it?

91 he did struggle, but he won again in 92, then just got flat out murdered by epo riders.


oh, and heres the link to that article you asked for, addresses ALL of what i was talking about, you seemed to have trouble understanding. Pay close attention to the part where the article notes it was CLEARLY a banned substance, yet he was getting testosterone treatments every 2 months for 2 years, while still riding as a pro, mmkay, happy reading:


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/d...-BOARDMAN-I-cycling-32-I-bones-old-woman.html

Do you actually understand that people can look back at what is written on this forum?

And that article does not say that at all. Have you even read it?

 

[86TDFWinner]

Or what? You are going to tell me how many Tours Greg won. Or what his VO2 max is. Scary stuff.

Nah, you already know all that, no need.

I don't even know what this means.

Didnt figure you would.

On a side note.
I am lucky enough to work with some pretty powerful computers in my job that analyse financial models. I used the Chris Froome model and calibrated it to Alpe d'Huez. I plugged in your data 86TDFWinner and...

You scored 38 minutes i.e. You are the 'Full ***'.

Thanks......{I think}. No wonder why financially the US is so F^%$&.

I see you havent read the article?

Congratulations for winning this debate and proving how boneheaded Ive been throughout

My pleasure. Just trying to make society a better place to live in. Good luck to you

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Who will win this pi$sing contest?

I blame you FGL
I am really done this time.

And if Boardman tests positive I will find the f$*ker myself...

 

[86TDFWinner]

Do you actually understand that people can look back at what is written on this forum?

And that article does not say that at all. Have you even read it?

Really? says so here:

'Testosterone supplements were banned in cycling and classed as a performance-enhancing drug,' he says. 'So I applied to the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) in early 1998 to be allowed the therapy on medical grounds, supplying scans to support my case. They said they thought it would be fine, but then Festina happened.'

Heres the part I really enjoyed, where he talks about knowing that theyre illegal and still does them for over 2 yrs.:

'Festina' was the drugs busts during the 1998 Tour de France. French police raided team hotels and confiscated a haul of banned substances, arresting a member of the Festina team. Cyclists pulled out of the race in droves, which that year was dubbed the 'Tour of Shame' .

'The UCI had to tighten up after the scandal and so they denied me permission,' he says. 'I would have to stop my career for the treatment or carry on.

'With my heart set on the 2000 Olympics I decided to try another treatment, but that helped my bones and not my fatigue.'

Chris was prescribed drug treatment that arrests the natural destruction of old bone cells and allows the creation of new cells to catch up.

During the final two years of his career he received treatment intravenously every two months at the Royal Liverpool hospital. 'I sat among 70-year-olds and felt as if I was in the wrong place,' he says.

LOL...sure looks like he admits it here. What do your "financial computers" have to say in response to that?

 

[Von Mises]

Really? says so here:




Heres the part I really enjoyed, where he talks about knowing that theyre illegal and still does them for over 2 yrs.:



LOL...sure looks like he admits it here. What do your "financial computers" have to say in response to that?

English is not my native language, maybe I am misreading, but I do not see admission here. He is talking about another treatment (not testosterone).

 

[Mr.38%]

English is not my native language, maybe I am misreading, but I do not see admission here. He is talking about another treatment (not testosterone).

Correct.

10

 

[86TDFWinner]

English is not my native language, maybe I am misreading, but I do not see admission here. He is talking about another treatment (not testosterone).

He was still taking some form of drugs, it also doesn't say that he didn't use it. How do we know he wasn't? We don't. He does admit to taking drugs though. Can we assume they too were banned whatever they were? Besides whatever drugs he was taking, could be considered PEDs, as they enhanced his performance.

 

[Von Mises]

He was still taking some form of drugs, it also doesn't say that he didn't use it. How do we know he wasn't? We don't. He does admit to taking drugs though.

Wtf, you said that he was taking testosterone, then you provide a link. But from this link we read that he did not get permission for testosterone and because of it he went for another treatment(not testosterone). And now you start wiggle "how do we know...we dont...it also doesnt say... etc etc" Come on, admit that you made a claim, what you cannot back up.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

oh, and heres the link to that article you asked for, addresses ALL of what i was talking about, you seemed to have trouble understanding. Pay close attention to the part where the article notes it was CLEARLY a banned substance, yet he was getting testosterone treatments every 2 months for 2 years, while still riding as a pro, mmkay, happy reading:


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/d...-BOARDMAN-I-cycling-32-I-bones-old-woman.html

I suggest you bone up on your reading comprehension. Getting it right will help your arguments, or help you realise when an argument is fallacious and not worth digging your heels in for.

The linked article precisely says Boardman did not have testosterone treatment before his retirement from competitive cycling.

After a diagnosis of osteoporosis in 1998 he applied for a TUE to enable testosterone hormone treatment (a normal medical procedure for people with such a condition) but the UCI rejected the application.

He wished to continue competing but the BMD issues were serious, and so an alternative (albeit less effective) and permitted treatment for the bone mineral density issues (bisphosphanates) was used during that period. It was this alternative treatment that was administered intravenously on a two-monthly basis.

Testosterone is not administered intravenously. It's typically administered via injection, subcutaneous administration or via skin absorption methods (gels, patches).

 

[Ferminal]

Was the reason for not taking testosterone because he was denied a TUE? I was always under the impression that he refused to take it on ethical grounds, even if he could have been granted an exemption.

 

[andy1234]

He was still taking some form of drugs, it also doesn't say that he didn't use it. How do we know he wasn't? We don't. He does admit to taking drugs though.

You were wrong.
You said he taking testosterone. He wasn't.
He was taking a non hormonal, permissible treatment.

f you could take 5 minutes to let your LeMond B0n*r go down,you may notice that no one is arguing against LeMond.

LeMond is clearly the most successful rider by a long way. BUT Boardman has just as many peers and associates who have put their own names on the line to claim he was riding clean, and guess what? LeMond is one of them.

LeMond wrote the foreword to one of Boardman's books and stated that he could "declare with complete confidence that Chris was a clean rider"
I'm not sure he has placed that level of conviction to print with anyone else.....

 

[Barnaby]

Alex, thank you for the first sensible and FACTUALLY ACCURATE post in umpty pages.

 

[mikehammer67]

I'm afraid we'll never know : for the 98 TdF prologue 2 samples out of 3 are missing, the third one is only "visually" positive, without any threshold value.

EDIT : stage 1 : 3 positives (1 above threshold, 1 under, one "visual") 1 negative... Where is Chris ?

what does this mean?

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Apologies to the thread starter and other contributors that this thread has gone on a bit of a tangent. And mods please feel free to delete any of the previous ramblings.

 

[ToreBear]

Was the reason for not taking testosterone because he was denied a TUE? I was always under the impression that he refused to take it on ethical grounds, even if he could have been granted an exemption.

That sounds like something the UK media would like to spin up. Boardman would have had to yell that it was because of lack of tue, not ethics, in all fora for half a year to correct that impression.

That's just a guess from my impression of UK media. I would not fault Boardman for not going to extraordinary lengths to correct that impression.

 

[andy1234]

That sounds like something the UK media would like to spin up. Boardman would have had to yell that it was because of lack of tue, not ethics, in all fora for half a year to correct that impression.

That's just a guess from my impression of UK media. I would not fault Boardman for not going to extraordinary lengths to correct that impression.

He stated very clearly that he applied for and wanted to use testosterone as a part of his treatment. There was no ambiguity at the time or subsequently.

 

[manafana]

Alex, thank you for the first sensible and FACTUALLY ACCURATE post in umpty pages.

second that good post and back on track.

 

[horsinabout]

I suggest you bone up on your reading comprehension. Getting it right will help your arguments, or help you realise when an argument is fallacious and not worth digging your heels in for.

The linked article precisely says Boardman did not have testosterone treatment before his retirement from competitive cycling.

After a diagnosis of osteoporosis in 1998 he applied for a TUE to enable testosterone hormone treatment (a normal medical procedure for people with such a condition) but the UCI rejected the application.

He wished to continue competing but the BMD issues were serious, and so an alternative (albeit less effective) and permitted treatment for the bone mineral density issues (bisphosphanates) was used during that period. It was this alternative treatment that was administered intravenously on a two-monthly basis.

Testosterone is not administered intravenously. It's typically administered via injection, subcutaneous administration or via skin absorption methods (gels, patches).

And what about this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steroid-induced_osteoporosis as a possible cause and effect? As known to be taken with EPO to make EPO most effective?

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

And what about this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steroid-induced_osteoporosis as a possible cause and effect? As known to be taken with EPO to make EPO most effective?

Steroid induced osteoporosis is one possibility but the biggest risk factor for most people is having a direct family history of the condition, as well as deficiencies in Vitamin D, calcium and in particular low levels of testosterone for men.

Given his mother had the disease, and he was reported to have deficiencies in vitamin D and testosterone (hence seeking a TUE for testosterone treatment), then his explanation is entirely plausible.

 

[horsinabout]

Steroid induced osteoporosis is one possibility but the biggest risk factor for most people is having a direct family history of the condition, as well as deficiencies in Vitamin D, calcium and in particular low levels of testosterone for men.

Given his mother had the disease, and he was reported to have deficiencies in vitamin D and testosterone (hence seeking a TUE for testosterone treatment), then his explanation is entirely plausible.

I know this is the reason given by Boardman for his condition. But I remain incredulous to this explanation on its own. My reason is that Boardman was put on a very low (specifically fat) diet by his coach Peter Keen, I know this as he often grumbled about it, discussed it in the media - it was common knowledge. This could have caused low Vit D and calcium etct? Also the circumstantial evidence i.e. that he competed in an EPO era and beat other (now known) dopers.

The family history is plausible and may be why he was more susceptible to the condition from the use of PEDS and also the low testosterone being another possible cause and effect. This is an opinion, but the family history explanation is not entirely conclusive given these mentioned other possible causes, and more plausible causes give his sporting endeavours.

 

[Winterfold]

He was still taking some form of drugs, it also doesn't say that he didn't use it. How do we know he wasn't? We don't. He does admit to taking drugs though. Can we assume they too were banned whatever they were? Besides whatever drugs he was taking, could be considered PEDs, as they enhanced his performance.

WTF? Dont assume becuase you make an *** out of you and me - in this case almost entirely you.

It really would pay to read your evidence before citing it in the future