Is Lance Armstrong a great?

[markinmanc]

7 Tours is an amazing achievement. But considering he usually had only one competitive race a year, whereas his competition usually had a full season of races does give him an advantage.

Seeing what little press he did, he seems to care little for the Tour.

An amazing rider, a champion, a winner, but better than Mercx etc - no imho.

[johnnyboy]

Is Lance Armstrong a cheat?

[mezdupmaiden]

7 Tours is an amazing achievement. But considering he usually had only one competitive race a year, whereas his competition usually had a full season of races does give him an advantage.

Seeing what little press he did, he seems to care little for the Tour.

An amazing rider, a champion, a winner, but better than Mercx etc - no imho.
an amazing rider.... how bad!

[Sound]

7 Tours is an amazing achievement. But considering he usually had only one competitive race a year, whereas his competition usually had a full season of races does give him an advantage.

Seeing what little press he did, he seems to care little for the Tour.

An amazing rider, a champion, a winner, but better than Mercx etc - no imho.

Well Eddie Mercxx seems to think so. He was asked the question directly last week and said that Armstrong was the better rider.

[Sound]

Is Lance Armstrong a cheat?

All testing would say no. There is plenty of damning circumstantial evidence alright but he is still the most tested athlete in the world.

[markinmanc]

I heard a reference on radio to his 'abnormally large heart and lungs'.

Watching him on TV, he doesn't seem much interested in cycling, just winning. Mind you he isn't comfortable with the media.

I suspect all future reviews of his acheivements will be qualified.

And if Eddy Mercx had to do only won race a year, how many Tours would he have won?

[EDDIEB]

Outstanding athelte and achievment and his speech yeaterday shows how much he cares about the tour and cycling.We are all lucky to have seen his story develop over the years.He has a couple of good biography books out there for anyone who is interested.Did the Houston to Austin MS-150 last year 185miles over 2 days and met some buddies of his who said that he does'nt do any performance enhancing drugs but is quite fond of weed in the off season exchanging lots of all the sponsorship crap he gets for copious ammounts of stuff.He'll still be involved in his discovery channel team.

[Sound]

I heard a reference on radio to his 'abnormally large heart and lungs'.

Watching him on TV, he doesn't seem much interested in cycling, just winning. Mind you he isn't comfortable with the media.

I suspect all future reviews of his acheivements will be qualified.

And if Eddy Mercx had to do only won race a year, how many Tours would he have won?

Nothing wrong with being interested in winning. Tiger Woods has the same manner. He has no reason to be comfortable with a media that has been out to get him from day one (in the case of the the French press at least.)

Qualification of his achievements would be small time IMO. He cannot be compared with anyone else in cycling anymore. Hence the reason he is now being compared with Jordan, Woods etc.

Mercxx may have raced more but he also tested positive twice in a time when amphetamines were more pervasive than the doping in the sport now. Plus, the testing regime was a joke. Mercxx is far from a whiter than white figure.

[General Michael Collins]

Who won the all time sporting lagend on sky one?Missed it last nite as I was in the pub.

[Lamps]

Is Lance Armstrong a cheat?

yes he is, a drugged up cheat, just like those chinese runners who only came out for the world championships to break the world record and dissapeared again for the rest of the year.

[Sound]

yes he is, a drugged up cheat, just like those chinese runners who only came out for the world championships to break the world record and dissapeared again for the rest of the year.

Evidence please.

[HeeAirO]

Is he banging Sheryl Crowe the git..

[dotty]

Who won the all time sporting lagend on sky one?Missed it last nite as I was in the pub.

Mohammad Ali!

[wideangle]

Lance is no cheat.He had two cases of cancer and to come back and win two more tours hes the greatest sports star of our time.
I wonder if he would of been able to win the triple seven years in a row.The triple being Giro de itilia,toue de france and the worlds?What ya thing you got to admit he deserves it did u see his nearest rivals suffering in the mountains...he just went for it a true allrounder in the sport time trial, team time trail,sprinter,climb er,desenter.

[Lamps]

anyone hear david walsh on the last word last night, he was fuming about armstrong again. i think walsh is a journo of integrity and would not go out to destroy someone for the hell of it. he was talking about the type of cheerleading going on hear about lance being the greatest sportsman ever.
he said anyone who putrs in a hlf hour's research into armstrongs carreer will start to ask some serious questions.

he's a summary of the book i picked up on the net.

The book focuses on statements attributed to Emma O'Reilly, a soigneur who worked with Armstrong from 1998-2000. O'Reilly claims Armstrong used the banned blood booster EPO.

O'Reilly also alleges that Armstrong asked her to dispose of bags with syringes after the 1998 Tour of Holland and that in May 1999, as Armstrong trained in the Pyrenees, O'Reilly said she was asked to drive to Spain to pick up drugs which she handed to Armstrong in a parking lot.

O'Reilly claims in the book Armstrong asked her to use makeup to cover up syringe marks on his arm at a Tour de France medical checkup in 1999.

Armstrong, a Texan, has neither tested positive for banned substances nor faced any bans over doping.

O'Reilly, 33, left the US Postal team in 2000 on apparently good terms, with ex-Postal coach Mark Gorski praising her.

Kevin Dessart, a spokesman for long-time Armstrong coach Chris Carmichael, said doping allegations anger Armstrong.

[Lamps]

Lance is no cheat.He had two cases of cancer and to come back and win two more tours hes the greatest sports star of our time.
I wonder if he would of been able to win the triple seven years in a row.The triple being Giro de itilia,toue de france and the worlds?What ya thing you got to admit he deserves it did u see his nearest rivals suffering in the mountains...he just went for it a true allrounder in the sport time trial, team time trail,sprinter,climb er,desenter.

why doesn't he compete in the other races so

[Sound]

anyone hear david walsh on the last word last night, he was fuming about armstrong again. i think walsh is a journo of integrity and would not go out to destroy someone for the hell of it. he was talking about the type of cheerleading going on hear about lance being the greatest sportsman ever.
he said anyone who putrs in a hlf hour's research into armstrongs carreer will start to ask some serious questions.

he's a summary of the book i picked up on the net.

The book focuses on statements attributed to Emma O'Reilly, a soigneur who worked with Armstrong from 1998-2000. O'Reilly claims Armstrong used the banned blood booster EPO.

O'Reilly also alleges that Armstrong asked her to dispose of bags with syringes after the 1998 Tour of Holland and that in May 1999, as Armstrong trained in the Pyrenees, O'Reilly said she was asked to drive to Spain to pick up drugs which she handed to Armstrong in a parking lot.

O'Reilly claims in the book Armstrong asked her to use makeup to cover up syringe marks on his arm at a Tour de France medical checkup in 1999.

Armstrong, a Texan, has neither tested positive for banned substances nor faced any bans over doping.

O'Reilly, 33, left the US Postal team in 2000 on apparently good terms, with ex-Postal coach Mark Gorski praising her.

Kevin Dessart, a spokesman for long-time Armstrong coach Chris Carmichael, said doping allegations anger Armstrong.

So Walsh's evidence and your evidence amounts to 'someone said it so it must be true'? No chance of her lying for profit? No chance of a member of the press digging for paydirt? Where are these syringes? Where are the track marks on Armstrong when he is pursued relentlessly by the French press? Where is a positive test for the most tested athlete on Earth? What is he doing differently from the myriad of athletes that are caught every year? Whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty?'.

So many questions, so little actual evidence...

[megatron]

armstrong is a legend for a man to battle cancer and become the greatest sportsman in his sport well done him

[Lamps]

open your eyes people, is he that good that he is far and away better than everyone and almost all of them are taking drugs too. there's no way he could be clean. cycling is worse than athletics for drugs. the sport stinks to the high heavens, thats why nobody has any interest in it anymore.

[EDDIEB]

open your eyes people, is he that good that he is far and away better than everyone and almost all of them are taking drugs too. there's no way he could be clean. cycling is worse than athletics for drugs. the sport stinks to the high heavens, thats why nobody has any interest in it anymore.

Dont let any "Facts" get in the way of a good story.So they are all taking drugs including Lance and he still beats them ? He's the most tested athlete in the history of the sport and after fighting and beating cancer.
He has NEVER failed a drugs test.Lance was the only rider to be tested last Friday.Let it go he's clean.

[Sound]

open your eyes people, is he that good that he is far and away better than everyone and almost all of them are taking drugs too. there's no way he could be clean. cycling is worse than athletics for drugs. the sport stinks to the high heavens, thats why nobody has any interest in it anymore.

The sport has definitely been compromised- that is not in question. But thats an awfully big tarring brush you are using there! I suggest to you that you have no real evidence and are giving your opinion. You are entitled to it but, surely, someone like Armstrong is entitled to a right of innocence until proven guilt?

[Lamps]

You are entitled to it but, surely, someone like Armstrong is entitled to a right of innocence until proven guilt?

fair enough, but everyone knew linford christie was on drugs, he just fucked up when he was in semi retriement and got caught(kept all his medals and records). michelle smith was never actually caught on drugs either. she still holds 3 gold medals. everyone knew she was on drugs.
carl lewis actually tested positive for banned stimulants 3 times before the 88 olympics and was let off by the US olympic comitee who covered it up.(won 4 medals)

i really wouldn't have much regard for sports which are based mainly on physical endurance or strength, they are too easilly corrupted. could you really count a sprinter/rower/cyclist especially from the last 30 years as one of the all time great sportspeople, personally i dont think so. jimmy magee had his top 10 legends on this weeks sunday world and included armstrong, eddie mercxx and i think carl lewis. there is no way i would include any of them

[Coin]

The sport has definitely been compromised- that is not in question. But thats an awfully big tarring brush you are using there! I suggest to you that you have no real evidence and are giving your opinion. You are entitled to it but, surely, someone like Armstrong is entitled to a right of innocence until proven guilt?
A team car was caught bringing enhancers across the border from Begium during the tour. A whole TEAM. How can you say the sport has any credibility left? They were years behind on bringing in testing, and I have no faith in the tests currently carried out. If Armstrong was caught now, it would absolutely destroy cycling, it would be 7 tours discredited.

[Sound]

A team car was caught bringing enhancers across the border from Begium during the tour. A whole TEAM. How can you say the sport has any credibility left? They were years behind on bringing in testing, and I have no faith in the tests currently carried out. If Armstrong was caught now, it would absolutely destroy cycling, it would be 7 tours discredited.


Absolutely. As I say, the sport mas been badly compromised. As regards Lance, I think he the greatest cyclist ever. He can be compared to all the great cyclists as they are all in the same sport which has always had the same problem with drugs. The difficulty comes when people try to compare between sports like Sky etc.

This is a very slippery slope though. The minute we start to assume that people are dirty, without a positive test, where do we stop? Granted, sports that are primarily speed or endurance based are more susceptible, but performance enhancing substances would benefit all sportsman to some degree.

What about rugby? Would the ability to recover from heavy weights sessions faster not benefit Paul O Connell or Brian O Driscoll?
What about soccer? Would Henry or Owen not benefit from greater fast stitch muscle fibre- leading to greater pace? Keane from being able to get up and down the pitch for longer?
That is a hugely flawed argument- they would all benefit. What about Rio missing his test? Or the lack of any decent testing in soccer? Lampard has made huge inprovements in his game in the last few years- why the assumption of innocence?

[Lamps]

What about rugby? Would the ability to recover from heavy weights sessions faster not benefit Paul O Connell or Brian O Driscoll?
What about soccer? Would Henry or Owen not benefit from greater fast stitch muscle fibre- leading to greater pace? Keane from being able to get up and down the pitch for longer?
That is a hugely flawed argument- they would all benefit. What about Rio missing his test? Or the lack of any decent testing in soccer? Lampard has made huge inprovements in his game in the last few years- why the assumption of innocence?

soccer, rugby, hurling, golf, snooker etc etc are games that are primarily based on skill. no matter what the drugs you take they will not alter your performance to a level where you are untouchable as the worlds best. michelle smith was at best an average swimmer, she starts taking steriods and she's wins 3 gold medals. the same goes for linford christie, he was about 28 years old when all of a sudden he started putting on this huge bulk of muscle and lo and behold he starts breaking world records and winning golds after being a bronze medal man for most of his entire career.
you can give a second division player all the performance enhancing drugs in the world and he won't be that much better as a player, he certainly isn't going to touch a drug free wayne rooney. thats the difference.

[Sound]

soccer, rugby, hurling, golf, snooker etc etc are games that are primarily based on skill. no matter what the drugs you take they will not alter your performance to a level where you are untouchable as the worlds best. michelle smith was at best an average swimmer, she starts taking steriods and she's wins 3 gold medals. the same goes for linford christie, he was about 28 years old when all of a sudden he started putting on this huge bulk of muscle and lo and behold he starts breaking world records and winning golds after being a bronze medal man for most of his entire career.
you can give a second division player all the performance enhancing drugs in the world and he won't be that much better as a player, he certainly isn't going to touch a drug free wayne rooney. thats the difference.

Point taken- you cannot inject skill but I did say that in the last post.

What I am questioning is the assumption of innocence in other sports but not cycling? What about Juve's supposed systematic doping in the early 90's? Jaap Stam? Edgar Davids? Fabio Cannavaro? Rio's missed test? And this is with a system nowhere as stringent as cycling's.

My point is that if we start assuming guilt, we are on a very slippery slope..

[Coin]

soccer, rugby, hurling, golf, snooker etc etc are games that are primarily based on skill. no matter what the drugs you take they will not alter your performance to a level where you are untouchable as the worlds best.
No, but to think that some soccer players and rubgy players (and probably GAA players) are not taking performance enhancers is simply naive. There is also slightly less of a stigma about it in team sports because its 11 v 11 or 15 v 15 and one player taking drugs has less of an impact on the overall result.

Every rugby player in the country seems to be on creatine (sp?), and I've seen the help it can be in bulking up. When you see the effect the legal stuff has it must be very very tempting to cross the line into illegal stuff. It really needs governing bodies in all sports around the world to be brave and start to catch their stars. The BALCO scandal in the states is helping a lot.

[Lamps]

No, but to think that some soccer players and rubgy players (and probably GAA players) are not taking performance enhancers is simply naive. There is also slightly less of a stigma about it in team sports because its 11 v 11 or 15 v 15 and one player taking drugs has less of an impact on the overall result.

point taken, but in the examples I mentioned, the drugs were the primary factor in their attaining the levels these people reached. although it may give you an advantage in soccer/hurling, success is more to do with natural sporting ability. i could take all the performance enhancing drugs in the world and i wouldn't make it to league of ireland standard because i just wouldn't be good enough on the ball.



Every rugby player in the country seems to be on creatine (sp?), and I've seen the help it can be in bulking up. When you see the effect the legal stuff has it must be very very tempting to cross the line into illegal stuff. It really needs governing bodies in all sports around the world to be brave and start to catch their stars. The BALCO scandal in the states is helping a lot.

good point about the rugby. i was told by a rugby player about 5 years ago that they all used to take steriods but that they can't anymore because of the testing. i think it has been cleaned up a lot.

[Sound]

good point about the rugby. i was told by a rugby player about 5 years ago that they all used to take steriods but that they can't anymore because of the testing. i think it has been cleaned up a lot.

So because you 'heard' that rugby has been cleaned up, it's grand but when a cyclist tests negatively repeatedly he is guilty anyway?

OK then.

[megatron]

how can ye say lance is a druggy, the man is a legend, for fuck sake give the man credit, he has never failed a drug test, he's after winning 7 in a row, a bit of bottle of cop on should be thrown at ye

[Lamps]

So because you 'heard' that rugby has been cleaned up, it's grand but when a cyclist tests negatively repeatedly he is guilty anyway?

OK then.

look i don't know if there are performance enhacing drugs used in rugby, i presume there probably are(as in most sports) but not to the same extent as the widespread rampant doping that goes on in cycling. the all blacks tore the lions apart last month and would have do so no matter if the lions had been using performance enhancers and the all blacks weren't, that's my point and thats the difference

[Coin]

how can ye say lance is a druggy, the man is a legend, for fuck sake give the man credit, he has never failed a drug test, he's after winning 7 in a row, a bit of bottle of cop on should be thrown at ye
It's not that I get some sort of twisted glee out of saying that someone who recovered from cancer to be a world class cyclist is a "druggy". I was reading through the wikipedia entry on Armstrong yesterday and even with my doubts the descriptions of his cycling were making the hairs on my arms stand up.

[Coin]

the all blacks tore the lions apart last month and would have do so no matter if the lions had been using performance enhancers and the all blacks weren't, that's my point and thats the difference
I don't think thats true. The differences at the top are minute, and if you doped a whole team I guarantee you'd make a big difference.

[Lamps]

I don't think thats true. The differences at the top are minute, and if you doped a whole team I guarantee you'd make a big difference.

with lord bald in charge no amount of steroids would have made a difference,
and a bit off the point, how is ronan o gara still so weak after 6 years as a professional player

[Sound]

look i don't know if there are performance enhacing drugs used in rugby, i presume there probably are(as in most sports) but not to the same extent as the widespread rampant doping that goes on in cycling. the all blacks tore the lions apart last month and would have do so no matter if the lions had been using performance enhancers and the all blacks weren't, that's my point and thats the difference

Not to the same extent eh? How do you know? Juventus in the 90's anyone?

You cant inject skill but greater speed, strength and endurance would bloody help! By your Armstrong rationale, next time I see Lamps/ Gerrard make a late burst into the box and power a shot past a keeper- I'll assume they are dirty.

[wideangle]

why doesn't he compete in the other races so
Because the best race to win is the tour de france,it is also the toughst and the longest.All the top riders could just race the tour and nothing else then there would be alot more contenders.Thats their choice to race the full season.

[Mr.Mister]

He's not a great!

He's only winning cos the can't catch him for drugs as he uses so many of them for cancer treatment and they can't trace them...

In fairness its the only race he enters every year!!!

[boshea]

In fairness its the only race he enters every year!!!

It's not the only race.....he always races a couple of the smaller races to prepare for it....even this year, he raced the tour of belgium only a few weeks before the tour de france.......he just doesn't race some of the other big tours, like the giro d'italia or anything like that.

you don't hear about him entering the other races, because none of the get anywhere near as much coverage as the tour. In fact, only 3 races seem to get coverage on eurosport every year.......the giro d'italia, the tour the france and the vuelta in spain.

He is actually a bit of a freak, and has always had an abnormally high V02max (which is basically the amount of oxygen you can inhale when your body is working hard).....more than double the average person, and a good deal greater than even his nearest competitors, which is a big advantage at the level he is at.

and while it's true that he takes a form of steroid as part of his ongoing cancer treatment, he's always been upfront about that....plus, like others here have said, he is THE MOST TESTED PROFESSIONAL ATHLETE IN THE WORLD.......if there were any abnormalities in his test results, or even a hint of him purposely taking a performance enhancing substance.....you can be pretty much guaranteed that every paper in the world would tear him to absolute shreds if there was even a .00001% possibility of it being true.

[JohnMullane]

he's still a great even if he is on the juice.

You can look at it in 2 ways... they are all on the juice in which case he's a great.
Or they are not all on the juice, in which case you have to say that he isnt on the juice as he's the most tested athlete going, in which case he's a great.
EPO is hard to detect and doesnt stay long in the system but this guy is tested more than anyone.
Doping was a lot more prevalent in the past in cycling. Have a read of Paul Kimmages rough ride for an idea.

I reckon its better to be a believer and have your dreams shattered that to be forever a sceptic.
If you're forever a sceptic you will never regard any great sporting achievement with any wonder and awe as the immediate thought is doping.

I mean, jesus, wouldn't it be some story if this guy nearly dies from cancer, battles through it and goes on to win THE toughest sporting event going a record amount of times. People need insiration like that.
You'll never have your heart lifted by a sporting spectacle with a cynics viewpoint.... Its only a matter of time before you start questioning rugby soccer and GAA, then what the hell do you have left?

[Sound]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/othe...ng/5033672.stm


Armstrong cleared in EPO inquiry

Amstrong retired after his record seventh straight win in Le Tour

Independent Dutch investigators have cleared Lance Armstrong of doping in the 1999 Tour de France.
French sports newspaper L'Equipe had claimed that Armstrong's samples on the 1999 Tour later tested positive.
But investigators exonerated him in a 132-page report on Wednesday and blamed anti-doping authorities for misconduct in dealing with the American cyclist.
Cycling's governing body, the UCI, said it had not yet received the report and is expected to release a statement.
Armstrong, who retired after his seventh straight Tour title last summer, has repeatedly denied using banned substances.
L'Equipe reported last August that six of his urine samples from 1999, when he won his first Tour title, came back positive for the endurance-boosting hormone EPO after they were retested in 2004.
The International Cycling Union (UCI) then appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman last October to investigate the handling of urine tests by the French national anti-doping laboratory, known as LNDD.
But Vrijman, who headed the Dutch anti-doping agency for 10 years and later defended athletes accused of doping, said on Wednesday that his report "exonerates Lance Armstrong completely with respect to alleged use of doping in the 1999 Tour de France." The report also said the UCI had not damaged Armstrong by releasing doping control forms to L'Equipe. However, it stated that world anti-doping agency Wada and the LNDD may have "behaved in ways that are completely inconsistent with the rules and regulations of international anti-doping control testing," and may also have been against the law.