Lance Armstrong about to go down on 60minutes.

Bobby1 wrote:

I love how people from the running world love to bash cyclists. How many of you morons believe the Africans aren't doping, including the now decease Sammy Wamjiru?

If doping is that prevalent in top professional cycling, I think it is likely happening a lot more than we'll ever know in all top level professional sports, including running, in the U.S. as well as Africa.

When you listen to some of the cyclists like Andreu or Lemond, they say that suddenly in the late 80s and early 90s everybody just started to ride a lot faster. There was a real shift in the tempo - and as they tell the story they went "WTF?" and started doping like everybody else. Doping wasn't new but it was suddenly much more systematic and effective.

So... look at distance running in the last 6-7 years. Especially on the marathon times have gotten a lot faster, and every new talent coming out of Kenya or Ethiopia seems to be a 2:06 guy right out of the gate. And look at the American performances from 5K and up. Those times had well and truly stagnated and now they're moving again with Solinsky, Ritz, Hall, etc.

So what do you think?

monkeyblossom wrote:

When you listen to some of the cyclists like Andreu or Lemond, they say that suddenly in the late 80s and early 90s everybody just started to ride a lot faster. There was a real shift in the tempo - and as they tell the story they went "WTF?" and started doping like everybody else. Doping wasn't new but it was suddenly much more systematic and effective.

So... look at distance running in the last 6-7 years. Especially on the marathon times have gotten a lot faster, and every new talent coming out of Kenya or Ethiopia seems to be a 2:06 guy right out of the gate. And look at the American performances from 5K and up. Those times had well and truly stagnated and now they're moving again with Solinsky, Ritz, Hall, etc.

So what do you think?

Interesting comment from Lemond re today's cyclists riding faster, in that Lemond's final day time trial when he beat Fignon is still one of the fastest ever.

Lemond, by the way, has been after Armstrong (and others) for years. Greg will be watching 60 Minutes tonight- that's for sure.

It's all hard to figure out who's clean and who's not, given cycling's extended doping history.

One thing for sure: If you took away Armstrong's seven Tours and gave them to the 2nd place guys, you'd probably be giving most, if not all of them, to someone who doped.

theohiostate wrote:

Interesting comment from Lemond re today's cyclists riding faster, in that Lemond's final day time trial when he beat Fignon is still one of the fastest ever.

Lemond, by the way, has been after Armstrong (and others) for years. Greg will be watching 60 Minutes tonight- that's for sure.

It's all hard to figure out who's clean and who's not, given cycling's extended doping history.

One thing for sure: If you took away Armstrong's seven Tours and gave them to the 2nd place guys, you'd probably be giving most, if not all of them, to someone who doped.

Regarding that Tour TT, Lemond says it had a 5K downhill stretch (at 3:00 of the following tape):

Here's a somewhat rambling speech, but I think heart-felt, from 2009.

I think in order to achieve a world class performance in most any sport nowadays an athlete has no choice but to engage in the use of performance enhancing substances. Sure Lance passed his tests. That doesn't mean he wasn't doping. It just means he found a way to evade positive test results. I would go as far as to say the top kenyans are doped, not because they want to be but because they are either convinced or coerced into it by agents and coaches looking to get a few more dollars out of their athletes. What kenyans aren't doped? The "B" level kenyans running mere mortal 2:25 marathons.

There's scientific evidence Lance doped. 6 of his -99 samples were positive for EPO when re-analyzed in 2005. Just google ashenden epo armstrong.

Also, he failed 3 T/E tests in 93-96 according to SI.

And he tested positive for cortisone in 99.

And both Floyd and Tyler are saying he was caught for EPO in Switzerland -01.

Moranss wrote:

There's scientific evidence Lance doped. 6 of his -99 samples were positive for EPO when re-analyzed in 2005. Just google ashenden epo armstrong.

Also, he failed 3 T/E tests in 93-96 according to SI.

And he tested positive for cortisone in 99.

And both Floyd and Tyler are saying he was caught for EPO in Switzerland -01.

Dude, you better tell UCI!

Lemond's record time trial was not downhill. As anyone who has been to Paris can attest, it is not hilly country. I have investigated the route of the course because this question has fascinated me. It is pretty much flat.

Similarly flat was the course that 17 years later, Zabriskie and Armstrong finally took down Lemond's record (just barely). Lemond's final TT in '89 was 25km long, Armstrong broke his record on a course of 19km. Furthermore, Lemond set his record time on the final day of the tour after 20 stages of gruelling racing. Zabriskie and Armstrong broke the record on the first day of the Tour in which they were fully rested! So the big doper Armstrong is the only one who can beat Lemond's time when all the circumstances favor a fast time for Armstrong? Also, the recent guys had better equipment, lighter gear, wind tunnel testing.

So, we are supposed to believe that clean St. Gregory could match Armstrong, when Armstrong had the benefit of EPO, full rest, a shorter course and better equipment. And barely two years prior, Lemond was shot with a shotgun and nearly killed! TWO YEARS BEFORE! Sorry, I believe that Lemond has to be the biggest cheat of all-time. There can be no other explanation.

monkeyblossom wrote:

When you listen to some of the cyclists like Andreu or Lemond, they say that suddenly in the late 80s and early 90s everybody just started to ride a lot faster. There was a real shift in the tempo - and as they tell the story they went "WTF?" and started doping like everybody else. Doping wasn't new but it was suddenly much more systematic and effective.

So... look at distance running in the last 6-7 years. Especially on the marathon times have gotten a lot faster, and every new talent coming out of Kenya or Ethiopia seems to be a 2:06 guy right out of the gate. And look at the American performances from 5K and up. Those times had well and truly stagnated and now they're moving again with Solinsky, Ritz, Hall, etc.

So what do you think?

I believe Solinski, Ritz, Hall, etc are clean because:

1.They were phenoms back in high school, which in America always indicated you would be running sub 13's and 2:05's later in your career..

2. They smile during interviews.

3. Started running more quality miles.

4. If they're on drugs, then why aren't they breaking world record!

suitcase of courage wrote:

Lemond's record time trial was not downhill. As anyone who has been to Paris can attest, it is not hilly country. I have investigated the route of the course because this question has fascinated me. It is pretty much flat.

According to this, the 1989 TT course was 25K long with a 75 meter net elevation drop, and a slight tailwind. Can't vouch for it otherwise, and I haven't been on the course. I have been in Paris, though, and it has its share of hills.

Most people who have been to Paris can attest that it is not in fact a country at all, but a city in France (which is a country).

I don't know the detail of that route but Paris is in fact not flat. The Champs Elysees is not flat by any means, as you can clearly see on the video.

Geographer wrote:

Most people who have been to Paris can attest that it is not in fact a country at all, but a city in France (which is a country).

I don't know the detail of that route but Paris is in fact not flat. The Champs Elysees is not flat by any means, as you can clearly see on the video.

You are apparently a non-reader because the original message says, "it is not hilly country" meaning the area around Paris is not hilly. This is different than "it is not A hilly country" which your brain somehow saw and interpreted as meaning that I didn't realize Paris isn't a country. I said the course was "pretty much flat" rather than "flat" because I knew someone would try to lamely argue that something like the Champs d'Elysees is a hill. There are a few hills around the Paris area, but Lemond's record course didn't go up or down any of them.

Where are all the Barry Bonds deniers or Marion Jones deniers. Funny that there is such support for Lance Armstrong. We believe doping stories when they involve home run hitting, 100 M running, black people.

Brilliant post. Thanks for sharing all of this.

Even Hincapie has testified against Lance. Those who still think he's innocent have rocks in their heads.

JoeGarland wrote:

According to this, the 1989 TT course was 25K long with a 75 meter net elevation drop, and a slight tailwind. Can't vouch for it otherwise, and I haven't been on the course. I have been in Paris, though, and it has its share of hills.

http://cyclingtorrents.nl/details.php?id=143

I hadn't looked into this before and the link didn't work for me, but that stage started in Versailles so I just went on mapmyrun.com and mapped a course from Versailles to Champs-Elysees. It does indeed have a nice elevation drop - the first part is slightly uphill and then from the Meudon forest it's downhill into Paris which itself is flat.

On most days the wind is from the West which is a tailwind on this course. But I remember Fignon being criticized for using his tricolore disc wheel so maybe there was more of a side wind on the day if that was a factor. Don't remember the details but then, whatever Lemond was on surely Fignon was on as well.

The American 5 and 10k times are back to Kennedy-esque times.

What do YOU think?

Most of it is BS. Written by a busted cyclist.

I've actually sat down, had dinner and a beer with Lance. From that 3 hour encounter, I can say that he didn't dope. No way, no how. The man almost died from cancer, literally. His pain threshold and outlook on life after that event were completely changed. First off, why would you put a toxin in your body that could potentially give you a much worse cancer. Do you really think LA wants to go through that hell again. He learned a LOT during his treatments. He learned that the Alps were nothing compared to chemotherapy. He learned that Le Aple D'Huez was just a simple ride around the block compared to chemotherapy.

Yes, everyone who has an axe to grind against LA is going to come out and try and tarnish his reputation. TH sounds like that girlfriend you dumped after a night of mediocre sex.