Lance Armstrong on Joe Rogan's Podcast

Look, there are days when I hate having to be at the beach by 10am to body paint supermodels. The sun is strong that time of day and I sometimes get paint on my arms. But just because I hate my job doesn't mean Armstrong could have rode as well as he did w/o the drugs. In fact, if he could have rode well w/o drugs, he obviously would have.

Great interview. You can tell he's still not comfortable telling the truth about a few things, but for the most part he was quite candid.

He's obviously an intelligent person as he understands the situation well from his perspective and the public's.

Ultimately, he was like the master magician in a grand traveling circus. Of course he couldn't tell people the truth of how he was performing his tricks, it's not what the circus is about and that's how you get blackballed.

I like that he openly states the real reason he got caught is because he showed too little respect for too many people. That is absolutely the truth.

i thought it was a great interview, Lance seemed mature, down to earth and expressed a caring attitude towards his family. I'm glad to see he's staying fit and doing lots of running. His a legend albeit greatly tainted by all the scandals, but I believe he operated in a largely even playing field regarding the use of PED's.

While Running Economy is for sure influenced by improved biomechanics, the O2 delivery is also a key component...it's a big part of the running economy equation.So wouldn't more RBCs (produced by taking some extra EPO), only help one's Threshold (LT ) and (all biomechanics/technique being equal) improve Running Economy at this velocity? Isn't it BOTH neuroscience AND the big engine model. Legs and Lungs?

Jon Orange wrote:

"... I believe that JD was right when he said that a marathon is run at 80% of VO2max and that the variance from elite runner to slow runner in negligable in this metabolic respect. So where does the improved economy come from? From the improvement in biomechanical skills.

To deny this is the real craziness. To continually give credence to the drug obsessive 'bigger engine' model or any such metabolic advancement is crazy. It's pure pseudoscience. Deal with it. Engage in the neuroscience or stop arguing."

You are disingenuous. You deliberately avoid this issues I raise.

The mention of glycogen ignores fat utilization. For much of a stage the team captains are riding at relatively low power outputs (drafting and being the fourth guy in line reduces power needs by around 70%).

To Be Clear wrote:

I like that he openly states the real reason he got caught is because he showed too little respect for too many people. That is absolutely the truth.

He's not comfortable telling the truth because the lines are practiced or just improvised, not actually the truth. The rules never ever applied to Lance. You'll note how well that explanation fits into his world view that the rules don't apply to him.

He was that way a long time ago as a junior on Carmichael's doping program and he's still that way. Toxic.

yawn wrote:

tired old statements wrote:

Jonny, you really need some more material. Can you get some more? Could you do that?

The sudden increase of pedalling skill due to EPO is silly. They should give EPO to kids who are struggling to learn in school if it works like that.

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. You're completely missing the point. I'm saying that cycling just like running involves biomechanical skills, this has nothing to do with EPO.

So? That doesn't explain how doiping manifests itself as better biomechanics which is how you explain the increased performance of a few extra liters of blood.

Jon,

I'm glad you are finally posting under your own name, instead of confusing the issue with one of your many pseudonyms. Let's focus on one issue at a time. Although please feel free to post as many published peer-reviewed articles as you want to show how your hypothesis has been tested and validated. I will read them all.

Is your contention that the 2011 Tour De France cyclists were not using EPO, Autologous blood transfusions, or other PEDs? It's really a simple yes or no question, but you seem determined to dodge it.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Jon,

I'm glad you are finally posting under your own name, instead of confusing the issue with one of your many pseudonyms. Let's focus on one issue at a time. Although please feel free to post as many published peer-reviewed articles as you want to show how your hypothesis has been tested and validated. I will read them all.

Is your contention that the 2011 Tour De France cyclists were not using EPO, Autologous blood transfusions, or other PEDs? It's really a simple yes or no question, but you seem determined to dodge it.

I don't think his pseudonyms were fooling you that much. He is unable to vary things enough to pull that off. Not sure why he wants to either. Perhaps to give the illusion that many think the way he does? Apart from his growing crowd of supporters "in Yorkshire".

luv2run wrote:

The mention of glycogen ignores fat utilization. For much of a stage the team captains are riding at relatively low power outputs (drafting and being the fourth guy in line reduces power needs by around 70%).

You have the numbers about right, but the wording is incorrect.

It does not reduce power output BY 70%. It reduces it TO 70% of what it might normally be at such a pace if that rider was on the front.

If you've ever ridden with a powermeter and raced at a high level you would know this. For instance, if guys are taking turns pulling at the front in the last few kilometers and are doing 600 watts or so, you can't expect to sit in the pack on 180 watts. That doesn't happen. If that were the case you would never be able to ride someone off your wheel.

Having done my graduate thesis in neurophysiology, I can assure all of you that you can relax and just stop engaging with Jon Orange. He is just trolling you by taking a position that is beyond absurd on a topic that is already divisive and creates a lot of emotion. The alternative is that he is so incredibly stupid that you can abandon any hope of him ever being able to understand even the simplest of concepts. Again, I think he is a troll, but I am also willing to accept he's just an idiot. The result is the same.