"Millar stridently defended his American friend over the ongoing allegations that have been repeatedly made against him. "There aren't drugs that do what Lance is doing," said Millar in reference to the Texan's record-breaking sixth Tour victory. "Lance could be on all the drugs in the world but they don't do that. I know they don't do that. He's a force of nature."
"I know who does and who doesn't and I know what doping does and doesn't do," said Millar, "and there are no miracle products. It doesn't make a donkey into a thoroughbred."
"psycholist" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de : news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
From Procycling.com:
"I know who does and who doesn't and I know what doping does and doesn't do," said Millar
I suppose that if he knows, so does Pallain (or will soon), the judge running the case. Would it be too much to wonder why Millar won't rat on friends other than Gaumont ?
"psycholist" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
From Procycling.com:
"Millar stridently defended his American friend over the ongoing
allegations
Quoted message said:
that have been repeatedly made against him. "There aren't drugs that do
what
Quoted message said:
Lance is doing," said Millar in reference to the Texan's record-breaking sixth Tour victory. "Lance could be on all the drugs in the world but they don't do that. I know they don't do that. He's a force of nature."
"I know who does and who doesn't and I know what doping does and doesn't do," said Millar, "and there are no miracle products. It doesn't make a donkey into a thoroughbred."
Here is a man who has undeniably lied about doping, no vague assumptions about jealousy, suspicious comments about why he would want to make money or is vengeful about a job he lost, no, he has lied pure and simple, it's been proven beyond reasonable doubt. With Millar on one side and Lemond on the other, who is more reliable?
"psycholist" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de : news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
From Procycling.com:
"I know who does and who doesn't and I know what doping does and doesn't do," said Millar
I suppose that if he knows, so does Pallain (or will soon), the judge running the case. Would it be too much to wonder why Millar won't rat on friends other than Gaumont ?
My take on Millar is that he has nothing to loose and everything to gain by coming clean about he does or doesn't know. IMHO
Race
"psycholist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
From Procycling.com:
"Millar stridently defended his American friend over the ongoing
allegations
Quoted message said:
that have been repeatedly made against him. "There aren't drugs that do
what
Quoted message said:
Lance is doing," said Millar in reference to the Texan's record-breaking sixth Tour victory. "Lance could be on all the drugs in the world but they don't do that. I know they don't do that. He's a force of nature."
"I know who does and who doesn't and I know what doping does and doesn't do," said Millar, "and there are no miracle products. It doesn't make a donkey into a thoroughbred."
"Jonathan v.d. Sluis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"psycholist" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
From Procycling.com:
"Millar stridently defended his American friend over the ongoing
allegations
Quoted message said:
that have been repeatedly made against him. "There aren't drugs that do
what
Quoted message said:
Lance is doing," said Millar in reference to the Texan's record-breaking sixth Tour victory. "Lance could be on all the drugs in the world but
they
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
don't do that. I know they don't do that. He's a force of nature."
"I know who does and who doesn't and I know what doping does and doesn't do," said Millar, "and there are no miracle products. It doesn't make a donkey into a thoroughbred."
Here is a man who has undeniably lied about doping, no vague assumptions about jealousy, suspicious comments about why he would want to make money
or
Quoted message said:
is vengeful about a job he lost, no, he has lied pure and simple, it's
been
Quoted message said:
proven beyond reasonable doubt. With Millar on one side and Lemond on the other, who is more reliable?
Beside the fact that Lemond clearly has better and closer access to the subject at hand with the single exception that Lemond has likely not had first hand experience with using EPO in competition. I will trust Millar when he says EPO won't turn you in to a TDF champ (duh). For the rest of the issues, I will also defer to Lemond.
On 08/01/2004 05:12 PM, in article [email hidden], "Chris"
Quoted message said:
"Jonathan v.d. Sluis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"psycholist" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
From Procycling.com:
"Millar stridently defended his American friend over the ongoing
allegations
Quoted message said:
that have been repeatedly made against him. "There aren't drugs that do
what
Quoted message said:
Lance is doing," said Millar in reference to the Texan's record-breaking sixth Tour victory. "Lance could be on all the drugs in the world but
they
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
don't do that. I know they don't do that. He's a force of nature."
"I know who does and who doesn't and I know what doping does and doesn't do," said Millar, "and there are no miracle products. It doesn't make a donkey into a thoroughbred."
Here is a man who has undeniably lied about doping, no vague assumptions about jealousy, suspicious comments about why he would want to make money
or
Quoted message said:
is vengeful about a job he lost, no, he has lied pure and simple, it's
been
Quoted message said:
proven beyond reasonable doubt. With Millar on one side and Lemond on the other, who is more reliable?
Beside the fact that Lemond clearly has better and closer access to the subject at hand with the single exception that Lemond has likely not had first hand experience with using EPO in competition. I will trust Millar when he says EPO won't turn you in to a TDF champ (duh). For the rest of the issues, I will also defer to Lemond.
-- Steven L. Sheffield stevens at veloworks dot com veloworks at worldnet dot ay tea tee dot net bellum pax est libertas servitus est ignoratio vis est ess ay ell tea ell ay kay ee sea aye tee why you ti ay aitch aitch tee tea pea colon [for word] slash [four ward] slash double-you double-yew double-ewe dot veloworks dot com [four word] slash
Here is a man who has undeniably lied about doping, no vague assumptions about jealousy, suspicious comments about why he would want to make money or is vengeful about a job he lost, no, he has lied pure and simple, it's been proven beyond reasonable doubt. With Millar on one side and Lemond on the other, who is more reliable?
I don't accept the premise that either of these guys: A) Has all the facts Or B) Is always 100% honest
It's entirely possible they're both full of [censored].
"Millar stridently defended his American friend over the ongoing allegations that have been repeatedly made against him. "There aren't drugs that do what Lance is doing," said Millar in reference to the Texan's record-breaking sixth Tour victory. "Lance could be on all the drugs in the world but they don't do that. I know they don't do that. He's a force of nature."
"I know who does and who doesn't and I know what doping does and doesn't do," said Millar, "and there are no miracle products. It doesn't make a donkey into a thoroughbred."
People in the sport, he [Millar] says, genuinely don't know whether their fellow competitors are using the drug [EPO]. "I only know about me. I didn't ask questions of other guys. Everyone is so paranoid now."
"Tim Lines" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht news:qviPc.231112$Oq2.48312@attbi_s52...
Quoted message said:
Jonathan v.d. Sluis said:
Here is a man who has undeniably lied about doping, no vague assumptions about jealousy, suspicious comments about why he would want to make
money or
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
is vengeful about a job he lost, no, he has lied pure and simple, it's
been
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
proven beyond reasonable doubt. With Millar on one side and Lemond on
the
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
other, who is more reliable?
I don't accept the premise that either of these guys: A) Has all the facts
Lemond probably has all the facts about the phonecall he has cited, but Millar surely has very few facts about Armstrong using dope.
Quoted message said:
Or B) Is always 100% honest
People are telling the truth until proven otherwise, but I wouldn't blindly trust other people's judgement. There is no proof that Lemond is lying, so I assume he is telling the truth. Millar is just drawing his conclusions and presenting them as facts.
Quoted message said:
It's entirely possible they're both full of [censored].
I see no reason to assume that. Lemond has been called a liar over and over, people are even erasing his name from their seatpost. But the first evidence that he's lying has yet to be given. Personally I haven't even read some statement by Armstrong giving a different account of events, but that's probably because I haven't looked hard enough.
"Chris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
"I know who does and who doesn't and I know what doping does and doesn't do," said Millar, "and there are no miracle products. It doesn't make a donkey into a thoroughbred."
Here is a man who has undeniably lied about doping, no vague assumptions about jealousy, suspicious comments about why he would want to make money
or
Quoted message said:
is vengeful about a job he lost, no, he has lied pure and simple, it's
been
Quoted message said:
proven beyond reasonable doubt. With Millar on one side and Lemond on the other, who is more reliable?
Beside the fact that Lemond clearly has better and closer access to the subject at hand with the single exception that Lemond has likely not had first hand experience with using EPO in competition. I will trust Millar when he says EPO won't turn you in to a TDF champ (duh). For the rest of the issues, I will also defer to Lemond.
The first time I (a schmoe not connected with the pro scene) heard about EPO was in connection with the death of Johannes Draaier.
Even if EPO isn't attributed to his death, it means the pro cycling world was aware of EPO as a blood booster back then (89-90), so this talk that EPO "wasn't around" in Lemond's time is [censored].
"I know who does and who doesn't and I know what doping does and doesn't do," said Millar, "and there are no miracle products. It doesn't make a donkey into a thoroughbred."
Seems like a silly comment to me. Sure you cant turn a donkey into a thoroughbred, but you can trurn a very good horse into a better one (why else would pros dope?), and that would be the issue. Not that I'm saying Lance is doping necessarily, just that Millars comment is silly and meaningless.
steve -- "A man was severely injured today in the Knutsford area."
"Amit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"Chris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> "I know who does and who doesn't and I know what doping does and
doesn't
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> do," said Millar, "and there are no miracle products. It doesn't
make a
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> donkey into a thoroughbred."
Here is a man who has undeniably lied about doping, no vague
assumptions
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
about jealousy, suspicious comments about why he would want to make
money
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
or
Quoted message said:
is vengeful about a job he lost, no, he has lied pure and simple, it's
been
Quoted message said:
proven beyond reasonable doubt. With Millar on one side and Lemond on
the
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
other, who is more reliable?
Beside the fact that Lemond clearly has better and closer access to the subject at hand with the single exception that Lemond has likely not had first hand experience with using EPO in competition. I will trust Millar when he says EPO won't turn you in to a TDF champ (duh). For the rest of
the
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
issues, I will also defer to Lemond.
The first time I (a schmoe not connected with the pro scene) heard about EPO was in connection with the death of Johannes Draaier.
Even if EPO isn't attributed to his death, it means the pro cycling world was aware of EPO as a blood booster back then (89-90), so this talk that EPO "wasn't around" in Lemond's time is [censored].
I don't think I ever said that "EPO wasn't around in Lemond's time". I'll think of a way to re-phrase my position but Lemond had already been a Tour winner by the time EPO was available, though I see your point. Lemond "could have" had first hand experience with EPO but I don't think he has. I remember very well that those Dutch riders died and the speculation about what was causing those heart attacks. It was in the last few years that Lemond was racing.
FWIW, I suspect Conconi and Ferrari as the first to experiment with EPO in managed doses to improve the performance of cyclists. Moser admitted to plenty of blood chemistry manipulation for his World Hour attempts in '84 and in '94 and I recall that he admitted who advised him. There were plenty of other high profile riders using the same medical advisors and winning lots of big races. If you look at results by nation, the Italians started to dominate outside of Italy in the late eighties and early nineties. I am thinking that EPO was used by a select few cyclists almost as soon as it was available and became widespread among Italian teams by about 1990 and the rest of the European top teams by the mid '90s. I think Bugno used it regularly by the time he won the 1990 Giro (where he suddenly could ride away from everyone else seemingly at will) and that Indurain used it starting in the same year (when he was 12th in the Tour I think but demonstrated the power he needed to start winning in 1991 through 1995). Indurain was the first pet project of Conconi and Ferrari (selected as an amateur to use scientific training protocols once they were proven effective at resurrecting Moser's career. he was selected because he had the power that Conconi calculated would allow him to dominate the Tour if they could maintain his power while taking 10 kilos from his weight. They planned to take 5 years and started to work with him in 1986, which is the season that Indurain won the Tour of the Future). Lemond started to lose races precisely when those that finished in front of him began to have access to EPO. There could be other explanations but that is what I believe. I have been following Conconi et al since the Moser project.
"Tim Lines" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:qviPc.231112$Oq2.48312@attbi_s52...
Quoted message said:
Jonathan v.d. Sluis said:
Here is a man who has undeniably lied about doping, no vague assumptions about jealousy, suspicious comments about why he would want to make
money or
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
is vengeful about a job he lost, no, he has lied pure and simple, it's
been
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
proven beyond reasonable doubt. With Millar on one side and Lemond on
the
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
other, who is more reliable?
I don't accept the premise that either of these guys: A) Has all the facts Or B) Is always 100% honest
It's entirely possible they're both full of [censored].
I forgot to say that. I agree. I trust Lemond more than Millar and I think Millar knows only what he has seen. Lemond has been following the sport for much longer and obviously was able to rise to the very top. Having said that, I have been suspicious of many things stated by Lemond. I was really just pointing out that Lemond is more likely to be correct about a third party than Millar, but maybe that point is not all that important. It is frustrating for everyone in the sport to have these drug problems effecting everyone's credibility.
"Chris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"Tim Lines" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:qviPc.231112$Oq2.48312@attbi_s52...
Quoted message said:
Jonathan v.d. Sluis said:
Here is a man who has undeniably lied about doping, no vague
assumptions
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
about jealousy, suspicious comments about why he would want to make
money or
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
is vengeful about a job he lost, no, he has lied pure and simple, it's
been
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
proven beyond reasonable doubt. With Millar on one side and Lemond on
the
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
other, who is more reliable?
I don't accept the premise that either of these guys: A) Has all the facts Or B) Is always 100% honest
It's entirely possible they're both full of [censored].
I forgot to say that. I agree. I trust Lemond more than Millar and I think Millar knows only what he has seen. Lemond has been following the sport
for
Quoted message said:
much longer and obviously was able to rise to the very top. Having said that, I have been suspicious of many things stated by Lemond. I was really just pointing out that Lemond is more likely to be correct about a third party than Millar, but maybe that point is not all that important. It is frustrating for everyone in the sport to have these drug problems
effecting
Quoted message said:
everyone's credibility.
Lemond was and still is very well connected in Europe, especially with cycling people in Belgium. Perhaps he knows some of the non-rider staff people in the service of Postal. The Postal back room is very Belgian.
People in the sport, he [Millar] says, genuinely don't know whether their fellow competitors are using the drug [EPO]. "I only know about me. I didn't ask questions of other guys. Everyone is so paranoid now."
If Millar had kept his cool he may have survived as the case now looks a bit shakey after the investigating police faked confessions from Cedric Vasseur.
