Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France (Page 2)
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
2008-07-18 2:53 PM in reply to: #1540733 |
Elite 2443 Athens, Georgia | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France sesh - 2008-07-18 3:51 PM benc84 - 2008-07-18 2:38 PM In a sport like bicycle racing in distances like that I just cant see how legit domination can take place. Sorry So I'm assuming you will make the same accusations towards Indurain, Hinault, Merckx, and Anquetil. But yeah, nobody has EVER dominated stage races before. It's only Lance that has ever been able to do this. And that is why I think he is the greatest. Just my opnion though. |
|
2008-07-18 2:58 PM in reply to: #1540732 |
Not a Coach 11473 Media, PA | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France triguynewbie - 2008-07-18 3:51 PM What circumstantial evidence? I am not following you here. Sorry. I'm just offering my opinion. It's an old debate in my mind. If you care about it, look into it yourself and make up your own mind. Perhaps you already have. No biggie either way. |
2008-07-18 3:02 PM in reply to: #1540742 |
Champion 5117 Brandon, MS | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France triguynewbie - 2008-07-18 2:53 PM sesh - 2008-07-18 3:51 PM And that is why I think he is the greatest. Just my opnion though.benc84 - 2008-07-18 2:38 PM In a sport like bicycle racing in distances like that I just cant see how legit domination can take place. Sorry So I'm assuming you will make the same accusations towards Indurain, Hinault, Merckx, and Anquetil. But yeah, nobody has EVER dominated stage races before. It's only Lance that has ever been able to do this. and I'll take Merckx |
2008-07-18 3:02 PM in reply to: #1540757 |
Elite 2443 Athens, Georgia | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France JohnnyKay - 2008-07-18 3:58 PM triguynewbie - 2008-07-18 3:51 PM What circumstantial evidence? I am not following you here. Sorry. I'm just offering my opinion. It's an old debate in my mind. If you care about it, look into it yourself and make up your own mind. Perhaps you already have. No biggie either way. I respect that. |
2008-07-18 3:03 PM in reply to: #1540761 |
Elite 2443 Athens, Georgia | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France sesh - 2008-07-18 4:02 PM triguynewbie - 2008-07-18 2:53 PM sesh - 2008-07-18 3:51 PM And that is why I think he is the greatest. Just my opnion though.benc84 - 2008-07-18 2:38 PM In a sport like bicycle racing in distances like that I just cant see how legit domination can take place. Sorry So I'm assuming you will make the same accusations towards Indurain, Hinault, Merckx, and Anquetil. But yeah, nobody has EVER dominated stage races before. It's only Lance that has ever been able to do this. and I'll take Merckx [/QUOTEHe was a doper though cause he dominated people |
2008-07-18 3:06 PM in reply to: #1540769 |
Champion 5117 Brandon, MS | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France triguynewbie - 2008-07-18 3:03 PM sesh - 2008-07-18 4:02 PM triguynewbie - 2008-07-18 2:53 PM And that is why I think he is the greatest. Just my opnion though.benc84 - 2008-07-18 2:38 PM In a sport like bicycle racing in distances like that I just cant see how legit domination can take place. Sorry So I'm assuming you will make the same accusations towards Indurain, Hinault, Merckx, and Anquetil. But yeah, nobody has EVER dominated stage races before. It's only Lance that has ever been able to do this. and I'll take Merckx:) He was a doper though cause he dominated people LOL... I have no proof that he wasn't dominating, so I guess you're right Edited by sesh 2008-07-18 3:08 PM |
|
2008-07-18 3:15 PM in reply to: #1540761 |
Champion 7036 Sarasota, FL | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France sesh - 2008-07-18 4:02 PM triguynewbie - 2008-07-18 2:53 PM sesh - 2008-07-18 3:51 PM And that is why I think he is the greatest. Just my opnion though.benc84 - 2008-07-18 2:38 PM In a sport like bicycle racing in distances like that I just cant see how legit domination can take place. Sorry So I'm assuming you will make the same accusations towards Indurain, Hinault, Merckx, and Anquetil. But yeah, nobody has EVER dominated stage races before. It's only Lance that has ever been able to do this. and I'll take Merckx
Merckx = "Ride Lots" Mark
|
2008-07-18 3:27 PM in reply to: #1539557 |
Elite 2733 Venture Industries, | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France Mesteren - 2008-07-18 10:36 AM tridantri - 2008-07-18 2:23 PM Mesteren - 2008-07-18 2:18 PM Ricco was 9th on the GC by the end of stage 11. He doped. Cadel Evans is above him on the GC. Is Evans doping then? He is according to you (or at least we should be suspicious of him).I can not say if he was doped or not, but he did win over a lot of riders who where doped and that to me is very suspicious.
YES, as I also said, I believe most (all) of them are dopped ! Some are just better at hiding it. Just because they have never been tested positive, dose NOT mean that they did not do drugs.Bjarne Riis won the Tour, he has admitted he was dope, but he NEVER tested positive. Zabel, winner of the Green jersey I don’t know how many time has also admitted taking drugs, but also he has never tested positive.
Mesteren: Are you really Greg LeMond? |
2008-07-18 3:40 PM in reply to: #1540687 |
Master 1359 South of SLC | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France benc84 - 2008-07-18 12:38 PM Obviously my opinion is all put forth with little to no evidence behind it. But to comment of a few of the easier comments supporting Lance, No steroids or any other masking agent will make him bigger like Barry or Roger They do little cardio he did 8 hrs of cardio in a day , No HgH is not detectable, not in urine not in blood not in hair. Im sure he trained like crazy but what pro doesnt train like a mad man. Maybe it was amazing history we witnessed like Michael Jordan and his teams of the nineties. Or maybe he discovered the ultimate path through drugs to take his training to the next level and thus that is why he considered the best to this day and till the end of time. In a sport like bicycle racing in distances like that I just cant see how legit domination can take place. Sorry Seriously, your gut may bring you to your conclusions, but hard facts and even circumstantial evidence do not. Years and years of testing by people who WANTED to bust him providing nothing but negative after negative test result. Say all you want that you believe he doped, but the evidence provides evidence that he did not. If you told me you were going to give me cancer and then guarantee that I would win a handful of IM world championships, I would turn you down without thinking twice. Chemotherapy and other cancer treatments are horrible, horrible solutions. My friends and family who have been through them have told me the treatment is as bad as the disease. Lance lived through that and came back to rose to the top of his sport. Again. I am not a Lance worshiper, but recognize his achievements for what they are. In your logic, we would have to question Ruth, DiMaggio, Gehrig, Napoleon, and Churchill. They dominated without doping, unless you count beer I guess. Give Lance the credit he is due. Mike |
2008-07-18 3:43 PM in reply to: #1539152 |
Elite 3020 Bay Area, CA | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France You know, I thought "Lance Armstrong's War" was a really good look at the guy's mindset. He is seriously bloody minded, and would stomp anyone into the dirt. Challenge him, and he'll do whatever it takes. It gave me a really different look at him vs. "It's Not About The Bike" which was also good, but was definitely the kinder, gentler Lance. And FWIW, I don't think he doped. He's been tested and tested completely randomly all the time. And, the guy is not stupid. Why would he risk everything (career, sponsorships, $$$)? Just don't think he's stupid enough to dope. The worst that I've ever heard about him is allegations - there's never been any sort of proof against him. |
2008-07-18 3:55 PM in reply to: #1540841 |
Expert 828 | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France Mesteren: Are you really Greg LeMond? (snerk)...funny.... To take the 'domination=doped' thing back almost a century...guess that means Babe Ruth was the original Doper not to get caught, cuz he was way more dominant than Lance ever thought of being... my .02....who cares. I like to think he's clean. It was beyond great to witness. Every once in a lifetime a special person comes along. No drugs, no cheating...just fabulous DNA and a work ethic that is unsurpassed. Einstein, Beethoven, Hawking...(don't think they doped but they were definitely in a class to themselves.) It doesn't have to be a sports figure to be 'incredible' and they are so good words don't do them justice. In my mind, LA is one of those. I work every day with cancer patients. 99% of them come out of their journey better people. More driven, more inspired. To me, he is just a vo2 freak of nature with an indominable will and a past history of enduring treatment that makes the worst day of suffering on the bike, a walk in the park.... |
|
2008-07-18 4:14 PM in reply to: #1540687 |
Master 1718 Loughborough, England | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France benc84 - 2008-07-18 8:38 PM Im sure he trained like crazy but what pro doesnt train like a mad man. All pros train like crazy but the winners always do that little extra. Mark Allen, when asked about winning the IronMan said something to the effect of 'the top 5 or 10 are all physically almost identical but why does one man win and another loose? *points to his head*' Lance always did that bit extra. benc84 - 2008-07-18 8:38 PM In a sport like bicycle racing in distances like that I just cant see how legit domination can take place. Sorry Why not? Don't forget you can't compare how you or I ride a bike to how the pros ride. If one person always trains harder and more effectivly than the rest then why shouldn't that person dominate? |
2008-07-18 4:42 PM in reply to: #1539152 |
Expert 1318 | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France I read all the replies and accusations. We've all heard it all before, I think. I'd just like to say that if Lance was to ever admit to taking drugs or test positive, it would absolutely crush mine and others opinion of him. I hold him in very high regard (up there with Michael Jordan), and would be pretty devastated if he cheated. I've got tons of respect and admiration for the man, and I think many others do here as well. That out of the way, I don't believe he doped. |
2008-07-18 9:25 PM in reply to: #1540733 |
Master 1915 Hamilton, Victoria | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France sesh - 2008-07-19 6:51 AM benc84 - 2008-07-18 2:38 PM In a sport like bicycle racing in distances like that I just cant see how legit domination can take place. Sorry So I'm assuming you will make the same accusations towards Indurain, Hinault, Merckx, and Anquetil. Of course, Anquetil DID take drugs. But yeah, nobody has EVER dominated stage races before. It's only Lance that has ever been able to do this. For fear of being flamed to a well done crisp... Name one stage race Lance 'dominated' outside the Tour de France. Eddy Merckx on the other hand won more races than anyone else; ever! Not only that they were serious race like Paris-Nice, Flesh Wallone, Liege-Bastone-Liege, Paris-Roubaix, Giro D'Italia, Vuelta Espana. Many of these race he won multiple time. Not to mention multiple World Cahmpion Jersey's The one gap in Merckx's TDF reign was when he was 'asked' not to compete to avoid it becoming a snore-fest. Also, in on TDF year he won the Yellow, Green AND Polka Dot jersyes. No-one will ever achieve that feat again. I am certainly not suggesting that Lance's feats were not amazing, they most certainly were, but he focussed almost entirely on the TDF. Merckx was the greatest rider ever. |
2008-07-19 3:18 AM in reply to: #1539152 |
Master 1718 Loughborough, England | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France It's difficult to compare Armstrong and Merckx as they are from very different eras. In my opinion Merckx is the greatest cyclist of all time because he won just about everything. I think Armstrong is the greatest Tour rider though. Edited by tridantri 2008-07-19 3:19 AM |
2008-07-19 11:27 AM in reply to: #1541434 |
Champion 5117 Brandon, MS | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France Iron_Gus - 2008-07-18 9:25 PM sesh - 2008-07-19 6:51 AM benc84 - 2008-07-18 2:38 PM In a sport like bicycle racing in distances like that I just cant see how legit domination can take place. Sorry So I'm assuming you will make the same accusations towards Indurain, Hinault, Merckx, and Anquetil. Of course, Anquetil DID take drugs. But yeah, nobody has EVER dominated stage races before. It's only Lance that has ever been able to do this. For fear of being flamed to a well done crisp... Name one stage race Lance 'dominated' outside the Tour de France. Eddy Merckx on the other hand won more races than anyone else; ever! Not only that they were serious race like Paris-Nice, Flesh Wallone, Liege-Bastone-Liege, Paris-Roubaix, Giro D'Italia, Vuelta Espana. Many of these race he won multiple time. Not to mention multiple World Cahmpion Jersey's The one gap in Merckx's TDF reign was when he was 'asked' not to compete to avoid it becoming a snore-fest. Also, in on TDF year he won the Yellow, Green AND Polka Dot jersyes. No-one will ever achieve that feat again. I am certainly not suggesting that Lance's feats were not amazing, they most certainly were, but he focussed almost entirely on the TDF. Merckx was the greatest rider ever. I should have put that last sentence in sarcasm red. I was merely making the point that saying Lance must have doped because you can't dominate such a hard race is assinine. It had been done before him, and will be done after him as well. So obviously, one CAN dominate a race like that. And for the record, I agree with you. No one comes close to Merckx. |
|
2008-07-19 2:25 PM in reply to: #1541434 |
Elite 2443 Athens, Georgia | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France Iron_Gus - 2008-07-18 10:25 PM sesh - 2008-07-19 6:51 AM benc84 - 2008-07-18 2:38 PM In a sport like bicycle racing in distances like that I just cant see how legit domination can take place. Sorry So I'm assuming you will make the same accusations towards Indurain, Hinault, Merckx, and Anquetil. Of course, Anquetil DID take drugs. But yeah, nobody has EVER dominated stage races before. It's only Lance that has ever been able to do this. For fear of being flamed to a well done crisp... Name one stage race Lance 'dominated' outside the Tour de France. Eddy Merckx on the other hand won more races than anyone else; ever! Not only that they were serious race like Paris-Nice, Flesh Wallone, Liege-Bastone-Liege, Paris-Roubaix, Giro D'Italia, Vuelta Espana. Many of these race he won multiple time. Not to mention multiple World Cahmpion Jersey's The one gap in Merckx's TDF reign was when he was 'asked' not to compete to avoid it becoming a snore-fest. Also, in on TDF year he won the Yellow, Green AND Polka Dot jersyes. No-one will ever achieve that feat again. I am certainly not suggesting that Lance's feats were not amazing, they most certainly were, but he focussed almost entirely on the TDF. Merckx was the greatest rider ever. Merckx was Belgian. Don't you know us snotty Americans are so stuck up we can't recognize Non-Americans. Edited by triguynewbie 2008-07-19 2:25 PM |
2008-07-19 7:31 PM in reply to: #1540255 |
Master 1669 "Home of Superman" | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France Rollin' Thunder - 2008-07-18 12:44 PM My opinion on this is you are a troll...it takes alot of guts to hide behind an anonymous Internet handle to post allegations like that. This topic has been debated ad nauseum and the only sound conclusion is the one that you come to yourself. Personally, I hate dopers. I have made comments on this subject on another thread and I will let them stay there. Lance has one hell of an engine and work ethic. If he was doping and so was everyone else, he still kicked their a$$e$. I don't feel that he doped, but like is mentioned, he worked harder and smarter than any other cyclists on the tour at the time. The guy is on a different planet, forget a different level.. I beat guys who are younger, better looking, and smarter than me all the time. I have to admit they have never accused me of doping at any of my races. I just out work people. I say Lance is still the man. Mike
Mike I think your dead on and .......You are the man!
|
2008-07-20 9:29 PM in reply to: #1539152 |
Veteran 192 Draper, Utah | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France Frankly, I don't care whether Lance doped or not. He was tested a million times and was found to be clean. Being the dirty American that I am, I DO care that Lance kicked the rest of the worlds A$$ 7 times and really pissed off the French in the process. LONG LIVE LANCE!!! |
2008-07-20 10:01 PM in reply to: #1540890 |
Iron Donkey 38643 , Wisconsin | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France Rollin' Thunder - 2008-07-18 3:40 PM benc84 - 2008-07-18 12:38 PM Obviously my opinion is all put forth with little to no evidence behind it. But to comment of a few of the easier comments supporting Lance, No steroids or any other masking agent will make him bigger like Barry or Roger They do little cardio he did 8 hrs of cardio in a day , No HgH is not detectable, not in urine not in blood not in hair. Im sure he trained like crazy but what pro doesnt train like a mad man. Maybe it was amazing history we witnessed like Michael Jordan and his teams of the nineties. Or maybe he discovered the ultimate path through drugs to take his training to the next level and thus that is why he considered the best to this day and till the end of time. In a sport like bicycle racing in distances like that I just cant see how legit domination can take place. Sorry Seriously, your gut may bring you to your conclusions, but hard facts and even circumstantial evidence do not. Years and years of testing by people who WANTED to bust him providing nothing but negative after negative test result. Say all you want that you believe he doped, but the evidence provides evidence that he did not. If you told me you were going to give me cancer and then guarantee that I would win a handful of IM world championships, I would turn you down without thinking twice. Chemotherapy and other cancer treatments are horrible, horrible solutions. My friends and family who have been through them have told me the treatment is as bad as the disease. Lance lived through that and came back to rose to the top of his sport. Again. I am not a Lance worshiper, but recognize his achievements for what they are. In your logic, we would have to question Ruth, DiMaggio, Gehrig, Napoleon, and Churchill. They dominated without doping, unless you count beer I guess. Give Lance the credit he is due. Mike There was a "documentary" of "The Science of Lance Armstrong" (or similarly named) that was on satellite (on the Science Channel). It talked about his battle against cancer, and all the other stuff regarding his physical capability, and the science of the bike Trek was working with him on. Some really cool stuff. |
2008-07-21 9:35 AM in reply to: #1539152 |
Member 61 Alabama | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France I'll put my.02 cents worht in. Not that it matters. Personally I think Lance doped. I used to not think this up until about a year ago with all this Landis scandal. I know Lance was tested more than anyone else but you can beat the tests. I read an article not too long ago about a doctor that worked with over 500 cyclists. He said he could count on 2 hands the number of cyclists that did not dope. Asked how those riders did that were clean... he answered "they finished back of the pack." They could not even come close to competing against another rider who was doping. He also said that due to the numerous ways to cover up doping, if a cyclist was caught doping, "he was dumb as a mule." Some things about the whole Lance era that worries me: 1. How many of Lance's teammates have been busted for doping... 4 maybe 5? 2. His main rivals that were able to put him in so much hurt, all have been busted for doping (Rasmussen, Jan, who else?). 3. And here is the kicker... you know what the major side effect of the overuse of testoterone is? are you sitting down?... testicular cancer. Kind of makes you go hmmm doesn't it? I also read that the lawsuit with Trek and Lemond could possibly bring out some new truthes about all this. Lance made for soem amazing racing... but I don't think for a second he was clean. And neither was Tyler. And neither was Floyd. Oh yeah, don't forget Heras and Beltraine. Any others I am forgetting? We may never know the truth and until then, he is innocent. |
|
2008-07-21 10:14 AM in reply to: #1545198 |
Elite 4235 Spring, TX | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France Shaggy - 2008-07-21 6:35 PM 3. And here is the kicker... you know what the major side effect of the overuse of testoterone is? are you sitting down?... testicular cancer. Kind of makes you go hmmm doesn't it? A lot of circumstantial evidence, but I can't argue with most of it. However, I'm not buying the cancer bit. He got cancer early in his career....well before he was tearing up the Tour. He didn't become a dominant cyclist until after the cancer. |
2008-07-21 12:00 PM in reply to: #1542360 |
Master 1359 South of SLC | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France medic1962 - 2008-07-19 5:31 PM Rollin' Thunder - 2008-07-18 12:44 PM My opinion on this is you are a troll...it takes alot of guts to hide behind an anonymous Internet handle to post allegations like that. This topic has been debated ad nauseum and the only sound conclusion is the one that you come to yourself. Personally, I hate dopers. I have made comments on this subject on another thread and I will let them stay there. Lance has one hell of an engine and work ethic. If he was doping and so was everyone else, he still kicked their a$$e$. I don't feel that he doped, but like is mentioned, he worked harder and smarter than any other cyclists on the tour at the time. The guy is on a different planet, forget a different level.. I beat guys who are younger, better looking, and smarter than me all the time. I have to admit they have never accused me of doping at any of my races. I just out work people. I say Lance is still the man. Mike
Mike I think your dead on and .......You are the man!
I don't beat a ton of them, but when I do beat someone, it is very satisfying. I know we are supposed to be a supportive bunch, but I still like beating someone. This discussion has gotten into the ridiculous. Rumors, circumstantial evidence, and innuendos are not going to convict Lance. He was tested a ton and those tests came back clean. When he ran a marathon recently, he still posted a time that was so much faster than any of mine that my respect for him went up yet again. Of course, he did not take a pee test at the end of that race, so the conspiracy theorists here may claim again that he doped for that race too. Mike |
2008-07-21 1:31 PM in reply to: #1545198 |
Master 1718 Loughborough, England | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France Shaggy - 2008-07-21 3:35 PM 1. How many of Lance's teammates have been busted for doping... 4 maybe 5? But never whilst racing under the guidance of Bruyneel/Armstrong. 2. His main rivals that were able to put him in so much hurt, all have been busted for doping (Rasmussen, Jan, who else?). They were never caught whilst competing against Lance so there's no evidence that Lance was racing against a doped Ullrich or Rasmussen or Basso.
3. And here is the kicker... you know what the major side effect of the overuse of testosterone is? are you sitting down?... testicular cancer. Kind of makes you go hmmm doesn't it? Thats just pure BS. You have to be taking testosterone for an extended period of time for this to happen and there is no way that Lance could have been. He simply wouldn't have been able to afford it as a young athlete from a deprived family. |
2008-07-21 1:32 PM in reply to: #1545328 |
Master 1718 Loughborough, England | Subject: RE: Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France AndrewMT - 2008-07-21 4:14 PM Shaggy - 2008-07-21 6:35 PM 3. And here is the kicker... you know what the major side effect of the overuse of testoterone is? are you sitting down?... testicular cancer. Kind of makes you go hmmm doesn't it? A lot of circumstantial evidence, but I can't argue with most of it. I think it's a stretch to even call that circumstantial evidence. |
|