Lance Armstrong

OffRoadie · **Posted:** Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:10 pm

#1. I don't care if he doped or not. He was the best of his generation, and he said that he would dedicate his life to fighting cancer when he got it, and he has.

jjthewhale · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 5:18 am

Definitely #1

The doping factor is so hazy, I dont think the french would hesitate one second to bust him of they had the evidence. Just think, maybe a frenchman would have won the tour in the last 20 years.
I raced against Lance as Juniors and he was far and away the best back then (1990). He is known to have a larger than normal heart, processing 15% more efficiently than you or I. And even if he was doping, I gaurantee you the rest of them were too and that evens it up in my opinion.

amor587 · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 7:07 am

#1.... nuf said

Canaan · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 9:18 am

jjthewhale wrote:

Definitely #1

The doping factor is so hazy, I dont think the french would hesitate one second to bust him of they had the evidence. Just think, maybe a frenchman would have won the tour in the last 20 years.
I raced against Lance as Juniors and he was far and away the best back then (1990). He is known to have a larger than normal heart, processing 15% more efficiently than you or I. And even if he was doping, I gaurantee you the rest of them were too and that evens it up in my opinion.

. . . and his muscles produce 25% less lactic acid at the same level of effort as the general population -- nice combo for a bike racer to have, eh?

jjthewhale · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 3:17 pm

Yeah who needs to dope with that deck of cards......

Canaan · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 3:47 pm

jjthewhale wrote:

Yeah who needs to dope with that deck of cards......

I decided to fact-check my 25% figure (suppose I should have done that before I posted, but where's the fun in that?) -- turns out he produces about 50% less. I'm starting to re-think my suspicions about his success. See the link below if you're interested.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... ong_2.html

PacMan · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 5:27 pm

I love all the people who assume he has doped just because he's been successful, even though he's never failed a test. And he's been tested just as often if not more than everyone else.

danimal · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 5:48 pm

PacMan wrote:

I love all the people who assume he has doped just because he's been successful, even though he's never failed a test. And he's been tested just as often if not more than everyone else.

he has failed a test. definitley. but it was deemed a bad test by a nuetral thrid party 6 months later. i think it was danish, dutch, hauge? either way, they absolved him. i dont have links but i remember it. a test was developed to test for something (I dont remember what exactly doping or substance) that there was o test for in the past. so they back tested his blood and he failed. that was the headline that day. and like I said minths later agencies denounced the test but he did fail that test. i am sorry i dont have datails but i did not imagine this. true, maybe the test was a setup by the french. my point is what if it wasnt. i do want to make myself clear that i love lance and hope he didnt. and lets not forget how much greg lemond thinks hes guilty. has anyone heard how confident he is that lance is guilty. i dont think its jealousy either. just my opinion and really, i hope i'm wrong lance!

PacMan · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 6:26 pm

danimal wrote:

PacMan wrote:

I love all the people who assume he has doped just because he's been successful, even though he's never failed a test. And he's been tested just as often if not more than everyone else.

he has failed a test. definitley. but it was deemed a bad test by a nuetral thrid party 6 months later. i think it was danish, dutch, hauge? either way, they absolved him. i dont have links but i remember it. a test was developed to test for something (I dont remember what exactly doping or substance) that there was o test for in the past. so they back tested his blood and he failed. that was the headline that day. and like I said minths later agencies denounced the test but he did fail that test. i am sorry i dont have datails but i did not imagine this. true, maybe the test was a setup by the french. my point is what if it wasnt. i do want to make myself clear that i love lance and hope he didnt. and lets not forget how much greg lemond thinks hes guilty. has anyone heard how confident he is that lance is guilty. i dont think its jealousy either. just my opinion and really, i hope i'm wrong lance!

Well, if he was absolved of it 6 months later, in my opinion, that means he didn't fail it. If you were arrested for a crime, were sent to trial and were acquitted 6 months later, you'd be a free man with a clean record. Same thing.

bjammin · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 6:31 pm

PacMan wrote:

danimal wrote:

PacMan wrote:

I love all the people who assume he has doped just because he's been successful, even though he's never failed a test. And he's been tested just as often if not more than everyone else.

he has failed a test. definitley. but it was deemed a bad test by a nuetral thrid party 6 months later. i think it was danish, dutch, hauge? either way, they absolved him. i dont have links but i remember it. a test was developed to test for something (I dont remember what exactly doping or substance) that there was o test for in the past. so they back tested his blood and he failed. that was the headline that day. and like I said minths later agencies denounced the test but he did fail that test. i am sorry i dont have datails but i did not imagine this. true, maybe the test was a setup by the french. my point is what if it wasnt. i do want to make myself clear that i love lance and hope he didnt. and lets not forget how much greg lemond thinks hes guilty. has anyone heard how confident he is that lance is guilty. i dont think its jealousy either. just my opinion and really, i hope i'm wrong lance!

Well, if he was absolved of it 6 months later, in my opinion, that means he didn't fail it. If you were arrested for a crime, were sent to trial and were acquitted 6 months later, you'd be a free man with a clean record. Same thing.

"Clean", no..."Free", yes.
I love his tenacity.
Go kick that little Spaniards ass Lance!

Canaan · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 9:07 pm

PacMan wrote:

I love all the people who assume he has doped just because he's been successful, even though he's never failed a test. And he's been tested just as often if not more than everyone else.

I don't assume he doped because he was successful. I assume he doped because many, many of his contemporaries doped and he still won. That is especially true when you consider that first and last place in the TdF are separated by about 1% - 2% of the winner's time. And don't kid yourself -- testing clean doesn't mean he didn't dope. There's not time to get into here, but there's plenty of anecdotal evidence that he did dope. That being said, he's a remarkable rider. Certainly the best of his generation and in some people's minds the best of all time.

ocd · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 9:52 pm

for the lance fans, I took it on the back side of the TT in Solvang.

Personally I am more of a Floyd fan.

Canaan · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 10:00 pm

ocd wrote:

for the lance fans, I took it on the back side of the TT in Solvang.

Personally I am more of a Floyd fan.

Likewise.

David-K · **Posted:** Wed Jun 17, 2009 10:55 pm

A definite #2 for me.

One of the best of all time - Completely

One of the most selfish of all time - Completely

It's time for him to step off and hand over his ride to an up-and-comer (insert one of many names here) who is currently struggling elsewhere because of Lance's apparent need to continue proving something to the world. Bro, you've been there and done that, better than anyone, EVER. Now, give it a rest.

Lance Armstrong

Who is online